Andrew Leary on 30 Aug 98 in NET_DEV

Hello Andrew

 SA>> Also worth considering is the message base. JAM puts all kludges
 SA>> in a seperate field, apart from the message text - so SOT/EOT
 SA>> will /not/ work in a JAM environment.

 AL> SOT/EOT is primarily intended to make processing of messages from
 AL> FTS-1 Type 2 packets easier.  If a JAM processor inserts them in the
 AL> proper place when scanning out messages, there's no reason why it

But if you're going to go to that bother of finding the SOT and EOT when
exporting, doesn't it defeat the purpose? Though I suppose it might make
it quicker further along the line. Not easier for the programmer of the
utilities though, they'll still have to work out the places anyway - 
because not everything will have SOT/EOT. Is the speed advantage worthwhile?

 AL> can't work.  I do agree that the kludges are rather unnecessary in a
 AL> JAM message base.  Most, if not all, programs that work with JAM will
 AL> display all kludges at the top of the message.

Yep - the kludges are stored in a subfield, apart from the msgtext, with
no indication of where they're supposed to go. I /think/ most readers
guess, say {at}PATH and BEEN-BY lines are shunted to the bottom when
kludges are viewed, and everything else goes topward.

--
Simon

--- Digital Dilemma