Re: Should we leave this automatic handling of signatures and HTML?

From: <jose.kahan_at_w3.org_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:07:30 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <199911031107.MAA27308_at_tuvalu.inrialpes.fr>

In our previous episode, Martin Schulze said:
>
> > Maybe I'm missing something. Is there any RFC defining this "--\n"
> > signature separation convention? I scanned some 20 recent messages in
> > my mailbox, all coming from different sources, and none of them uses
> > the "--\n" convention.
>
> What do they use instead?
>

Anything!

mutt, exmh, and emacs seem to use "--\n".

Others just copy the signature file as is, or put lots of "------" in the line above it.

I can guarantee you that if you look at your message box, you can verify what I'm saying. I didn't look at 20 messages that satisfied my rule, but the first 20 messages in my mailbox.

I found the possible origin of "--\n" in an elmrc file:

# do we want dashes above signatures? (News 2.11 compatibility and convention) ### sigdashes = ON

The point I want to make is:

• Is it an RFC convention or not to separate signatures with "--\n" ( or "---\n", etc).
• If it is not, would you like to have a setup configuration to avoid having this automatic signature rule.

This thing only concerns people who are using the showhtml option.

-Jose Received on Wed 03 Nov 1999 01:08:24 PM GMT