Sig Delimiters (was: Re: [linux-elitists] Boies Faces Ethics Charges)

Gerald Oskoboiny gerald@impressive.net
Thu Jul 24 17:54:38 PDT 2003


* Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> [2003-07-25 09:48+1000]
> On 24-Jul-2003, Nick Moffitt wrote:
> > begin_ Martin Pool  quotation:
> > > --
> > > Martin
> > That .signature delimiter is unbecoming of an elitist.  
> 
> To make it slightly easier for Martin, here's what Nick is referring to:
> 
>     <http://email.about.com/cs/netiquettetips/a/et030601.htm>
>     <http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/afw/sig_dashes.php3>
>     <http://www.templetons.com/usenet-format/sig-len.html>
> 
> In addition, RFC 1046 specifies this format, but its focus is Usenet.

I think you must be thinking of "son of 1036"?

> I can't find anything canonical to specify this convention for email.

RFC 2646 (on format=flowed etc) includes:

 4.3.  Usenet Signature Convention

    There is a convention in Usenet news of using "-- " as the separator 
    line between the body and the signature of a message.  When          
    generating a Format=Flowed message containing a Usenet-style
    separator before the signature, the separator line is sent as-is.
    This is a special case; an (optionally quoted) line consisting of 
    DASH DASH SP is not considered flowed.

But that isn't exactly authoritative for email either.

The state of email standards seems fairly broken to me in general.
Whenever I want to flame someone because their autoresponder is
broken or something, I find it difficult to find references to
back me up. Anyone have good refs handy for that kind of thing?

-- 
Gerald Oskoboiny <gerald@impressive.net>
http://impressive.net/people/gerald/



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list