lyndon wrote:
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.
why? how? it seems to me that you have to work pretty hard to
get them into the wild -- mhbuild will eliminate them normally, won't
it?
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf(_at_)foxharp(_dot_)boston(_dot_)ma(_dot_)us (arlington, ma,
where it's 49.5 degrees)
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers