(First message had inccorrectly quoted headerlines) On Mon, 16 May 2005 22:43:10 +0100, Clive Taylor wrote:
> MAU was right in an earlier message about your headers. For some > reason the leading and trailing < > are being stripped from the > message references. Yes. Mulberry shouldn't do that as it is against RFC-XXX (don't know which one) recommendations/rules. > Compare mine in the post I just made in this thread from > Mulberry and yours - there is a difference. Why it's happening > I don't know, though. Let me quote the relevant header part of your message: | In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <[EMAIL PROTECTED] | .12]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This looks like a right mess. For one reason or another TB! adds backslashes before the dots in the domain part of the Message-ID in the In-Reply-To header line. Perhaps it thinks it should be treated as a regular Expression? Moreover, my antique TB! 2.12 doesn't even recognize the format <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Message-ID! On the other hand there is Mulburry, incorrectly cutting off Message-ID's in the References headerline. Conclusion: Two mail clients not treating References ID's as they should do according to the relevant RFC. Oh welll, I've seen even worse... Arjan <shrug> -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ________________________________________________________ Current beta is (none) | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
