On 2004-Oct-13, at 13:51, Charles Lindsey wrote:
You have mentioned transcriptions which MIGHT occur. You mentioned no
examples which HAD occurred, nor any current software which could cause
them to occur.
I am aware of no such software, and doubt that any such software
exists.
I feel it's a flawed understandig of what a standard SHOULD be: It's
not a summary of what the old and known software actually does. It
should describe the best way what should be done how. A standard never
is up-to-date as long as improvements are possible. A standard is never
complete since you can't (and should not) describe every possible risk.
But it's a bad idea just to ignore something that may become a real
problem: Defining what a right-hand-part actuallly is and how it has to
be formatted seems to be a reasonable idea.
I'd wish someone would have done the simple thing to define e.g. "Re: "
for replies. Up to then most software should have been well behaved,
using "Re:" only. But since that time every software engineer seems to
be eager to create his own local language option here...