Re: client-side empty eyesockets the wave of the future?

From: Charlie Stross (charlie@antipope.org)
Date: Tue Apr 23 2002 - 11:28:13 MDT


On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:28:17PM -0600, Hermit wrote:
>
>
> [Charlie 1]
> [Hermit 2]
> [hr]
> [quote author=Charlie Stross link=board=61;threadid=51564;start=0#227431 date=1019470869][/quote]
>
> [Hermit 2] To ensure legibility in broken clients this mail has been formated to 72 columns
>
> 123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012
>
> [ snip ]
 
Oh no it hasn't. (See, I'm not re-wrapping what comes into my MUA.)

> [Charlie 1] Hermit, your email tool isn't wrapping lines properly. This causes problems for
> those of us with standards-compliant mail utilities.
>
> [Hermit 2] RFC-821 and successors limits line length to "1000 characters or less" (none of

RFC821 is the standard for SMTP, a transport protocol; it's not a
standard for message body contents other than specifying the codeset
and limitations on what you can put in the DATA section of a message.

I draw your attention to RFC2822, which states:

>2.3. Body
>
> The body of a message is simply lines of US-ASCII characters. The
> only two limitations on the body are as follows:
>
> - CR and LF MUST only occur together as CRLF; they MUST NOT appear
> independently in the body.
>
> - Lines of characters in the body MUST be limited to 998 characters,
> and SHOULD be limited to 78 characters, excluding the CRLF.

Note the SHOULD. Lines longer than 78 characters aren't technically a
violation of the RFC, but you're bending the rules by using them.

-- Charlie



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:37 MST