Hi kre,
> Does anyone have a good (or even passable) way to write an mhl format
> file description which will do something sane (not just ignore) fields
> which are annotations added by anno ?
I'm not sure what you consider sane. They can be combined, but mhl can
only be told a field contains addresses or dates, not both. And combining
doesn't strip duplicates, e.g. ‘a@b.c’ below.
$ cat 1
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
foo: a@b.c, d@e.f
foo: Sat, 14 May 2022 10:13:58 +0100
foo: a@b.c, h@h.i
foo: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
bar: x@y.z
bar: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:59 +0100
$
$ cat format
:Before
foo:compress,nosplit,overflowoffset=4
bar:compress,nosplit,overflowoffset=4
:After
$
$ /usr/lib/nmh/mhl -w 72 -form format 1
Before
foo: a@b.c, d@e.f Sat, 14 May 2022 10:13:58 +0100 a@b.c, h@h.i Sat, 14
May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
bar: x@y.z Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:59 +0100
After
$
> About their only other defining feature is that they precede all other
> fields in the message (even the return-path field).
If anno(1)'s -append isn't given.
--
Cheers, Ralph.
