Re: LM_NET Header Protocol Suggestion

["Steve K. Grant" <sgrant@eis.calstate.edu>]

On Thu, 7 Apr 1994, Lora Koehler wrote:

> The question mark sounds like a good idea, but it might be better to
> include it at the beginning of the subject line rather than the end. I
> don't know about your mail program, but ours chops off the ends of
> subject lines that are too long. If you were scanning your message index
> you wouldn't see the question mark in many cases.

Also a good idea/refinement to my original suggestion.  Let's see how
this looks:

                ?McGraw Hill Encyc. of Sci...on CD-

and a reply would be:

                McGraw Hill Encyc. of Sci...on CD-R

or, the replyer's email program might (as mine does) insert an "Re:",
like this:

                Re:?McGraw Hill Encyc. of Sci...on

Now you have a question mark, but there's also an "Re:".  Hmm...doesn't
look too bad.  An additional _comment_ (as opposed to a direct answer to
the original question) would look like either of these:

                McGraw Hill Encyc. of Sci...on CD-
                Re:McGraw Hill Encyc. of Sci...on

I _do_ think putting the question mark at the _beginning_ of a
query/request is better than at the end (even though it looks odd),
because of that long-header truncation that occurs in the "index" view of
one's mailbox.

But I'm thinking now that the Q:/A:/C: is even better.

        Steve Grant, Library Media Teacher
        La Jolla High School (California) (619) 454-3081 x228
        sgrant@ctp.org