[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Please thread the discussion

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Randall R Schulz <rschulz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 12:49:49 -0800
Message-id: <200711061249.49673.rschulz@xxxxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 06 November 2007 11:57, Chris Menzel wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 10:03:20AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > Surely as software professionals we can agree that standards are
> > generally a good thing and that this standard is no exception to
> > that rule. Shouldn't we thus conclude that using non-conformant
> > software is to be strongly discouraged?
> Sounds right to me.  Is there a list of conformant/nonconformant
> clients somewhere, or a simple way to tell one from the other?  I
> mostly use mutt, which I would bet big money is comformant, and OS
> X's Mail.app, which I'd *suspect* is conformant, but I just don't
> know.    (01)

Well, I've been avoiding name-dropping, but Outlook and Outlook Express 
are the culprits here. Their transgressions go beyond threading, 
however, but I won't get into that, 'cause it probably constitutes 
matters of taste.    (02)

I don't know for a fact, but I'm sure Mutt is conformant. It's actually 
not that hard to do, but for some reason Microsoft has remained 
intransigent with Outlook / Outlook Express.    (03)

I've only used KMail for the past several years, and it's compliant.    (04)

> > Definitely a pet peeve of mine...
> No kidding? :-)    (05)

Can you tell?    (06)

> -chris    (07)

Randall Schulz    (08)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (09)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>