On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 03:19:25PM -0600, Bob Tanner wrote: [snip] > > As an aside, I'll probably shut off the hack because I like Jacque :-), but I'm > interested in your opinions. In a world of IE only web sites, Windows only > attachements, is this really that bad of a thing? > Neat hack. Maybe someone with more email savvy knows better, but here's all I could find about it in RFC 822 [http://sunsite.dk/RFC/rfc/rfc822.html]: 4.7.5. USER-DEFINED-FIELD Individual users of network mail are free to define and use additional header fields. Such fields must have names which are not already used in the current specification or in any definitions of extension-fields, and the overall syntax of these user-defined-fields must conform to this specification's rules for delimiting and folding fields. Due to the extension-field publishing process, the name of a user- defined-field may be pre-empted Note: The prefatory string "X-" will never be used in the names of Extension-fields. This provides user-defined fields with a protected set of names. Not surprising that Outlook users worry when messages do things that catch them by surprise. :-) -- johntrammell at yahoo.com | 78BA 706C C5F9 9321 E7C4 933B D063 907B A88E 924B Twin Cities Linux Users Group (TCLUG) Mailing List http://www.mn-linux.org Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota irc.openprojects.net #tclug