From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/7771
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Different "Re:" Styles
Date: 30 Aug 1996 21:39:37 +0200
Message-ID: <x6ohjsoe4m.fsf@eyesore.no>
References: <x2vie1u6d7.fsf@lemming0.lem.uni-karlsruhe.de>
	<w8s7mqh9216.fsf@hrym.ifi.uio.no>
	<s5kvie1fil7.fsf@hp138.rz.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
	<rj3f15gqbf.fsf@kolmogorov.dina.kvl.dk>
	<s5khgplrqvb.fsf@hp138.rz.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035148039 8475 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:07:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:07:19 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA13465 for <steve@miranova.com>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:44:01 -0700
Original-Received: from ylfing.ifi.uio.no (ylfing.ifi.uio.no [129.240.94.25]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <WAA13856@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 22:30:21 +0200
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by ylfing.ifi.uio.no ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 22:30:20 +0200
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
In-Reply-To: Jost Krieger's message of 30 Aug 1996 14:36:08 +0200
Original-Lines: 18
X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.21/Emacs 19.29
X-Face: &w!^oO<W.WBH]FsTP:P0f9X6M-ygaADlA_)eF$<UwQzj7:C=Gi<a?/_4$LX^@$Qq7-O&XHp
 lDARi8e8iT<(A$LWAZD*xjk^')/wI5nG;1cNB>~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\<y
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7771
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7771

Jost Krieger <Jost.Krieger@rz.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:

> For the case of Mail, I cannot find *any* codification of "Re: ",
> however.

No, RFC822 does not specify that the Subject in replies should have
"Re: " prepended.  RFC822 was written in a long-gone age, where things
that were self-evident simply was not discussed.  RFC822 wasn't
written to be read by morons -- ``Hey, RFC822 doesn't explicitly
prohibit us from adding the string "wE aRe ElItE!!!!!1!!" to the end
of all lines passing through our server, so let's do that!!!!1!''  --
so MicroSoft Exchange can add whatever it wants to any parts of all
mail messages it generates.  Don't expect me to bother with dealing
with the junk, though.

-- 
  "Yes.  The journey through the human heart 
     would have to wait until some other time."