Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA07255; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 11:53:50 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.4); Mon, 1 Apr 1996 11:53:30 -0500 Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA07152; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 11:53:24 -0500 Received: from [205.214.160.44] (d8.netgate.net [205.214.160.40]) by ng.netgate.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA13484 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 09:04:09 -0800 X-Sender: dcrocker@ng.netgate.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199604011537.KAA09893@augusta.math.psu.edu> References: Your message of "01 Apr 1996 04:12:45 GMT." <19960401041245.3709.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu> <19960401041245.3709.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 08:48:31 -0800 To: drums@cs.utk.edu From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: "." in phrase At 7:37 AM 4/1/96, Dave Barr wrote: >In message <19960401041245.3709.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu>, D. J. >Bernstein wr >ites: >>It makes the syntax two lines smaller, at the expense of compatibility >>with (at least) millions of stored messages. > >If that's all that breaks then I don't see what the problem is. >"millions of messages" isn't all that many to be worried about. >You said yourself the percentage is very very low. This exchange highlights my own confusion. Just what impact will removing dot from specials have? We already have parsers generally enhanced to be able to process this occurrence, since it happens, albeit illegally. No? d/ -------------------- Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253 Brandenburg Consulting fax: +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@brandenburg.com Sunnyvale CA 94086 USA http://www.brandenburg.com Internet Mail Consortium http://www.imc.org, info@imc.org