Email List: Xaustin-review-lX
[All Lists]

Re: Defect in XCU mailx

To: Nick Stoughton <yyyy@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Defect in XCU mailx
From: Paul Eggert <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:41:01 -0700
Cc: yyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <200403191454.OAA11604@xxxxxx><1081454418.1119.207.camel@collie>
At Thu, 08 Apr 2004 13:00:19 -0700, Nick Stoughton <yyyy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I would propose that we return to this wording, or at least the first
> sentence of it.

Yes, that sounds right.

> some mailx implementations *might* add their own Date: line, but the format
> of this line is dictated by RFC-822, and does not support localization.
> Therefore LC_TIME should not affect this.

A minor point: RFC-2822 does allow comments in 'Date:' lines, and they
can be localized.  For example, in Montreal mailx might generate this:

  Date: 08 Apr 2004 13:00 -0400 (HAE)

because HAE is the standard French abbreviation for eastern daylight
time (as specified by the CAN/CSA-Z234.4-89 standard).  Usage like
this is rare, but not unheard of.  I just Googled and found
<http://www.cmc.ec.gc.ca/rpn/daley-symposium/submitted-documents/_Bishop_Craig_H._Craig_Bishop_abstract.txt>
which has "Wed, 2 Jul 2003 01:22:08 -0400 (HAE)" (admittedly in a
Received: line, but it's the same principle).

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