On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> > A quick look at the documentation reveals that's deliberate. I'm not
> > sure I agree that it's the best way to do it, but I see why it works the
> > way it does.
>
> It's a header, f'heaven's sake. The ability to put it in the body at all
> is a hack to work around broken mailers.
Yes, Roger's right. I was basically the one who came up with this design,
along with Jason when we fixed a previously unknown and unreliable system
of approving messages that didn't work for everybody.
If I remember correctly (gosh, I can't even remember what I've designed!)
there are three methods to approving messages:
1) Replacing ALL the headers and using the Approved header -- all in the
message body. Don't forget that line between headers and message !
2) Take a regular message and place the Approved header in the first line
of the message text
3) Send a regular message and just take on a Approved header (not in the
message body).
Why did we do it this way? Well, first of all, we wanted to take account
of broken mailers, so we allowed all the headers to be replaced in the
message body. Or for those mailers that don't allow adding headers, we
allowed the Approved header to be placed in the first line.
Why is the blank line required? Well, let's say you wanted to do this:
(headers)
Approved: blah blah blah
Iamstartingmymessagebody: and decided to place a colon on the line
How would it know what's header and what's not? THe blank line is the
answer.
That's it in about one page....
----------------------------------
| Brock Rozen | brozen@torah.org |
----------------------------------
References:
|
|
