On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:43:03PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
On 26 April 2006 15:30, mwoehlke wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 12:04:40AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Christopher Faylor, le Tue 25 Apr 2006 14:05:54 -0400, a ?crit :
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 06:01:49PM +0000, g.r.vansickle@xxxxx
wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
tsk, tsk.
This really is a losing battle isn't it?
Has anyone considered reconfiguring the mail software to 'correct'
this automatically?
Well, it's trivial to configure rewriting of email headers.
But we're talking about body text here, and the web archive of this
list. If you keep what you present to the world as an authentic
record of what people wrote, then there are moral and perhaps even
legal implications if you feel you're allowed to rewrite it - even in
what seems a mechanical and trivial way, the thing is that what you
are then presenting in your "archive" is in fact *not verbatim*.
You're correct in saying it wouldn't be varbatim, but I wonder how
important that really is. My own carefully-preserved archives of
correspondence and list subscriptions go back years, but I'd be the
first to admit that most of it is rubbish, including anything written by
me.
As for any related legal issues, I'd wager a hippo to a dollar that
Google's lawyers have sorted them out long ago.
Plus the problems it would cause when somebody quotes a bit of program
code with an at sign in it that triggers a false positive and gets
mangled into non-compilable gibberish.
Might be a fair compromise. Personally, I find Google's interface
unreadable, but I doubt I'm alone in saying that I appreciate the
lengths they've gone to in preserving the confidentiality of personal
information.