PE> No, I only delete them when displaying user-text. The address
PE> is still gathered from the last origin line.

BL>   Eh? The *last* origin line? How do you know which one is the right 
BL> one? I thought EOT was supposed to identify it? Do you read the first 
BL> one following EOT or the last one following EOT, or the last one?

I always use the last one.  Read the SOT/EOT rationale, it has the
algorithm I use.  I have posted it often enough, FREQ it if you are
too dense to read mail.

BL> What out-of-spec message? Which FTS spec did I break?

PE> You didn't. You violated the only FSC spec that defines
PE> SOT/EOT.

BL>   Are you saying that #1 EOT may not be typed in a message? I am not

DEAD RIGHT.

BL> making any proposals. I'm not trying to use your EOT keyword. I'm just
BL> typing #1EOT as part of normal text in a message, using a mailer which
BL> does not add SOT/EOT.

You CANNOT use 0x01 in your messages.

BL>   This is exactly the same as typing AREA: as the first line in a

It is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.  The former is control characters, in
the domain of software.  The latter is ASCII text, in the domain of
the user.  You're pretty bloody thick if you don't understand the
difference between the two.

BL>   If I typed "MSGID" is normal text, a msgig-aware reader
would read 
BL> the first one outside text and ignore the false one in text. The same

And if the software isn't generating a MSGID, making yours the only
one?  No, the MSGID spec is not faulty.  YOU are faulty.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---