On Oct 10, 2016, at 9:26 AM, Ken Hornstein <kenh(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
I am going on prior art here; specifically, Fcc. I don't see the value
in adding an Nmh- prefix to any Nmh-specific header. I realize this is
something that there is not universal agreement on.
It's a simple namespace issue. These headers escape the nmh environment.
Being generic, other software might attribute other meanings to them, and do
unexpected things. Putting everything behind "nmh-", and advertising we do so,
mostly eliminates the risk.
This means, moving forward, we only generate nmh-* headers, while continuing to
accept the old ones.
This is particularly important now that "forw -mime" is becoming the default;
these headers *will* escape now.
--lyndon
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers