Re: Encapsulated submissions
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg34745] Re: Encapsulated submissions
- From: Igor Chudov <ichudov at Algebra.Com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 03:42:03 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <200206031925.UAA01760@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
- Reply-to: ichudov at Algebra.Com
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
stump does recognize encapsulated posts. The heuristic is that they have no Subject: [mg34745] field, and that the real headers are present in the body starting on the first line. It works fine, I have not seen encapsulated submissions in my approval queues in a long time. I hope that your standard will provide asy means for people to submit articles via email to submission addresses of mod groups. igor On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0100, Charles Lindsey wrote: > > It has always been the case that CNews (and some others too, I believe) > submits an article to a moderator by encapsulating the complete article > within the body of an email message to the moderator. Most other systems > seem to send the article to the moderator as an email, simply by > including a Newsgroups-header in the email, and maybe adding a To-header > to get it to the moderator. > > Since there are a fair number of CNews systems around (though they are > clearly in a minority) I haver always assumed that moderators had long > ago learnt to cope with both formats (certainly I have managed to post > articles to various newsgroups using CNews). > > What I would like to know is what proportion of articles currently > arrive encapsulated, and what proportion do not? And do moderators have > any particular problem with them, and also do robomoderators like Stump > recognise both formats? > > The Usefor draft will try to shift the balance so that encapulation > will become the norm (there are agreed technical advantages in doing > this). It is argued that this is not a change to current practice, since > current practice already recognises both formats. However, some doubt > has been expressed about this, and so I am writing to this list to gauge > what the current practice actually is. > > Note that both practices should still work under the new draft. It > is just a question of which is to be encouraged and which is to be > deprecated. > > Please reply directly to me as well as to this list, since I am not sure > whether my attempt to subscribe to this list has worked yet. > > Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ > Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl > Email: chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. > PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5 > > > ================================================================== > == ascm moderators list, cybercpa at prodigy.com == > == Your replies will be automatically sent to the list == > == Send your submissions _to the list_ to ascm-mods at algebra.com == > ==================================================================