RFC fuer Re: vs. AW:

[Jan-Benedict Glaw]

On Tue, 2004-08-10 15:15:08 +0200, Carola Kummert <carola.kummert at uni-bielefeld.de>
wrote in message <1092143708.16070.18.camel at ronja>:
> nachdem mir Google irgendwie nix vernuenftiges zum Thema geben will und
> ich auch keinen Nerv habe, wirklich bis zum 359.284sten Treffer graben
> mag; vielleicht weisz einer von euch, wie der korrekte RFC heiszt, der
> sich ueber "Re:", "Fw:" etc auslaesst?

RFC2822, 3.6.5 Informational Fields:
                                        The "Subject:" field is the most
   common and contains a short string identifying the topic of the
   message.  When used in a reply, the field body MAY start with the
   string "Re: " (from the Latin "res", in the matter of) followed by
   the contents of the "Subject:" field body of the original message.
   If this is done, only one instance of the literal string "Re: " ought
   to be used since use of other strings or more than one instance can
   lead to undesirable consequences.


MfG, JBG

-- 
Jan-Benedict Glaw       jbglaw at lug-owl.de    . +49-172-7608481             _ O _
"Eine Freie Meinung in  einem Freien Kopf    | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg  _ _ O
 fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! |   im Irak!   O O O
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lug-owl.de/pipermail/linux/attachments/20040810/a42d682b/attachment.sig>