From: daz <dooby@...10.karoo.co.uk>
Date: 2004-06-07T04:53:40+09:00
Subject: Re: Reply wasn't posted; will test new post


Thomas Fini Hansen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 02:53:39AM +0900, daz wrote:
> >
> >
> > A References: header is accepted by:
> >   RFC822: Standard for ARPA Internet Text Messages
>
> August 13, 1982
>
>
> The header is mentioned in a >20 year old spec, does contradict the
> claim that it's a news header only, doesn't it?

I think so.


> > and
> >   RFC850: Standard for Interchange of USENET Messages
> >
> >   "... the rule is adopted that all  USENET  news  articles
> >     must  be formatted as valid ARPANET mail messages,
> >     according to the ARPANET standard RFC 822."
> >
> > Our missing ML-> NG messages, after conversion from mail to news by rubygate,
> > are valid to RFC822/RFC850 standard regardless of the MUA used for posting.
>
> That's reverse logic, it only claims that all news messages is valid
> mails, not that all mail is valid news.

The claim that ruby-talk mail is converted by rubygate to RFC850 news
comes from me, supported by my (and others') empirical evidence.


daz