On May 9, 2011, at 5:14 PM, John Levine wrote: > I think it was a mistake to include l= in the first place, but I > find Murray's arguments against taking it out now persuasive.
Agreed (which is a -1 to removal.) > I would also really like to have a better idea of how people are > using it, notably, for all those messages where l= doesn't cover > the whole body, what's in the naked part. Agreed. -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
