In <200201312346(_dot_)SAA17401(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
I don't know how much we can control how X- fields are 'viewed' by
people who don't read the RFCs to see what X- was intended to mean.
The most we could do is write new RFCs that alter or clarify the
meaning of X-. But if people didn't read the old RFCs, will they
read the new one?
But which RFCs actually tell you what X-fields are intended to mean? RFC
2822 is silent on the matter. Usefor currently mentions them for
essentially the "write-only" applications. Graham Klyne's draft provides
suitable discouragement (and that is probably the best place to say
whatever needs to be said).
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5