Silent != second-class :)
Lou McIntosh
Somebody has said,
>Not at all. People who won't write email don't contribute to the list,
>neither publicly nor privately. There's nothing bogus nor elitist in that.
Ah, but (1) you never know when one of them might suddenly make his first
post -- this is my first-ever post :) -- and (2) no one has been in a
position to judge whether I've derived benefit during the couple of years
I've lurked here; and (3) certainly no one but me can tell whether my
list-subscribers have benefited from the knowledge I picked up here. Chuq
is right. No one should take my silence for inarticulateness, and nobody
needs to arrogate unto himself the right to condemn people who don't spring
to their keyboards and fire off a response every seventeenth message. I
wouldn't call it "bogus" or "elitist" -- I would merely say, "fails the
reality test".
There, now, have I adequately misrepresented everyone's respective
positions? :)
Elsewhere, Bernie Cosell writes:
>But as for signatures, would just filtering off after "--<space>" be
>sufficient, or is that not widely-enough accepted as a "my .sig begins
>here" convention to use for this purpose [and/or are too many list
>members probably not clueful enough to be able to get that set up
>properly in any event...]
>
If you do that, you are assured of missing almost all of my
very-occasional posts, because I use space-doubledash-space in the middle
of my message text to signify a pause or a gasp or a parenthetical phrase
or a lapse of memory -- um, where was I?
<meta name=lurk value=resume>
Bernie Cosell
> Elsewhere, Bernie Cosell writes:
> >But as for signatures, would just filtering off after "--<space>" be
> >sufficient, or is that not widely-enough accepted as a "my .sig begins
> >here" convention..
> If you do that, you are assured of missing almost all of my
> very-occasional posts, because I use space-doubledash-space in the middle
> of my message text to signify a pause or a gasp or a parenthetical phrase
> or a lapse of memory -- um, where was I?
I think that the usual convention requires that the '-- ' occur as a line
all by itself. That is, the flag is "<NL>--<space><NL>".
OTOH, I can't remember where I _saw_ that as a 'standard' for introducing
a signature... Must be something left over from the ancient days... [I
guess that the 'modern' .sig is a MIME section with one of those blasted
.vcf files...]
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:ber...@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--
Chuq Von Rospach
> OTOH, I can't remember where I _saw_ that as a 'standard' for introducing
> a signature... Must be something left over from the ancient days...
It's a de-facto standard introduced by the Usenet software, but I
don't believe it's ever been made official in any RFC or standards
doc.
--
Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chu...@plaidworks.com)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:ch...@apple.com)
Pokemon is a game where children go into the woods and capture furry
little creatures and then bring them home and teach them to pit fight.
JT
> I think that the usual convention requires that the '-- ' occur as a line
> all by itself. That is, the flag is "<NL>--<space><NL>".
Yes, that is the usual convention.
> OTOH, I can't remember where I _saw_ that as a 'standard' for introducing
> a signature... Must be something left over from the ancient days... [I
> guess that the 'modern' .sig is a MIME section with one of those blasted
> .vcf files...]
Actually, it's mentioned (in passing) in an RFC about usenet messages. It
is not called out as a standard for email anywhere (yes, I went and looked
:)
--JT
--
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
Russ Allbery
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Bernie Cosell wrote:
>> OTOH, I can't remember where I _saw_ that as a 'standard' for
>> introducing a signature... Must be something left over from the
>> ancient days... [I guess that the 'modern' .sig is a MIME section with
>> one of those blasted .vcf files...]
> Actually, it's mentioned (in passing) in an RFC about usenet messages.
> It is not called out as a standard for email anywhere (yes, I went and
> looked :)
I don't believe it is; neither "--" nor the string "signature" appear
anywhere in RFC 1036. It is mentioned in Son-of-RFC-1036, but that was at
most an Internet Draft, never an RFC.
It's mentioned in passing in the current USEFOR draft and in RFC 2646
(text/plain; format=flowed specification).
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Tim Pierce
>
> I think that the usual convention requires that the '-- ' occur as a line
> all by itself. That is, the flag is "<NL>--<space><NL>".
That's right.
> OTOH, I can't remember where I _saw_ that as a 'standard' for introducing
> a signature... Must be something left over from the ancient days... [I
> guess that the 'modern' .sig is a MIME section with one of those blasted
> .vcf files...]
I thought the hyphen-hyphen-space convention was mentioned in RFC 1036,
but perhaps I'm thinking of the orphaned son-of-1036 draft. Now I
can't find any official recommendation for signature delimiters. It's
a shame.
--
Regards,
Tim Pierce
RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator
and Chief Hacking Officer