From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/11849 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: François Pinard Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: gnus date suggestion Date: 05 Aug 1997 19:07:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035151492 367 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 22:04:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-Path: Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id RAA02687 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 17:22:56 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA17159 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 19:18:35 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 01:07:31 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 319 invoked by uid 504); 5 Aug 1997 23:07:30 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 316 invoked from network); 5 Aug 1997 23:07:29 -0000 Original-Received: from rtsq.grics.qc.ca (root@199.84.132.10) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 5 Aug 1997 23:07:28 -0000 Original-Received: by rtsq.grics.qc.ca (8.7.5/8.7.3) with UUCP id TAA08601; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 19:06:39 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: rtsq.grics.qc.ca: uicule set sender to pinard@icule.progiciels-bpi.ca using -f Original-Received: by icule.progiciels-bpi.ca (8.8.4/8.7.3) id TAA01860; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 19:07:05 -0400 Original-To: Hrvoje Niksic X-Face: "b_m|CE6#'Q8fliQrwHl9K,]PA_o'*S~Dva{~b1n*)K*A(BIwQW.:LY?t4~xhYka_.LV?Qq `}X|71X0ea&H]9Dsk!`kxBXlG;q$mLfv_vtaHK_rHFKu]4'<*LWCyUe@ZcI6"*wB5M@[m writes: | I don't think ISO 8601 is allowed by RFC822, but I may be wrong. ISO 8601 is not allowed by RFC 822. RFC 822 discourage the transmission of all 8 bits either. RFC 822 has such a few signs of obsolescence. A great number of sites are nevertheless transmitting 8-bit mail. I think RFC's are there to help trigger progress, and they usually do at the time they are written. But it comes a time where some RFC's are inhibiting progress, and when that time comes, we should stay able to move forward. I give reason to those using 8bit channels for transmitting mail (the EHLO protocol is fine) despite what RFC 822 may say. I hope the same will happen for dates. Let's be more progressive than submissive! :-) -- François Pinard mailto:pinard@iro.umontreal.ca Support Programming Freedom, join our League! Ask lpf@lpf.org for info