Does anyone have a good (or even passable) way to write an mhl format
file description which will do something sane (not just ignore) fields
which are annotations added by anno ?
I'm not sure what you consider sane. They can be combined, but mhl can
only be told a field contains addresses or dates, not both. And combining
doesn't strip duplicates, e.g. ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ below.
$ cat 1
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
foo: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
foo: Sat, 14 May 2022 10:13:58 +0100
foo: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
foo: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
bar: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:59 +0100
$ cat format
$ /usr/lib/nmh/mhl -w 72 -form format 1
foo: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Sat, 14 May 2022 10:13:58 +0100 email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Sat, 14
May 2022 11:13:58 +0100
bar: email@example.com Sat, 14 May 2022 11:13:59 +0100
About their only other defining feature is that they precede all other
fields in the message (even the return-path field).
If anno(1)'s -append isn't given.