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

Sorry, I've been out of town doing real work. ;)  

# In our previous episode, Peter C. McCluskey said:
# >
# > The autodetection of signatures works a lot of the time, and
# > occasionally adding <PRE>'s where they don't belong does much
# > less harm than avoiding them where they are needed, so I strongly
# > object to removing this.
#
# 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.

This is a Usenet convention from many (1982) years back.

trn, rn, xrn, tin and other posting software use an

        $echo "-- "

type of line to insert the signature separator.

usually a

"-- \n"
"--\n"
"---\n"
"--- \n"

is recognized as a signature. This is definitely something we want to keep as people go to great lengths to format their .signature files just right for ascii transmission. The <pre>...</pre> is definitely needed in that case.  

# What I propose to do is to add a new setup option so that you can say if
# you whether you want this automatic sig detection.

Reasonable but we can do that after we get things out the door. (That is unless it has already been done... ;))

-- 
Kent Landfield                        Phone: 1-817-545-2502             
Email: kent_at_landfield.com             http://www.landfield.com/
Email: kent_at_nfr.net                   http://www.nfr.net/
Search the Usenet FAQ Archive at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/
Search the RFC/FYI/STD/BCP Archive at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/