PE> Ordinary users CANNOT, because EOT has an x'01', which you
PE> cannot enter as a normal user.

BL>   I entered the #1 just like that, alt-1 on the keyboard. Where does
BL> it say in an FTS spec (including your FTS-0505) that I am not allowed
BL> to enter #1 in text? You're doing it with SOT/EOT. Why not me too?

BL>   FTS-1 (or ypour own FTS-0501) does not ban the use of #1. How can
BL> it when it's so easy to type it in? It only says that a line beginning
BL> with #1 will be a control line with a unique keyword.

It does ban it, and it is not easy to type it in.  Like I say,
log on to Sydney PCUG and see how far you get.  The only people
who can type it in are people who are responsible for the 
integrity of their own messages, and that includes you.  Well,
you have a responsibility to me, and I have a responsibility on
your behalf to the rest of fido.  

And FTS-1 DOES ban the use of 0x01 from user-text, even if you
don't understand it.  Just the same as it bans 0x00.  It doesn't
need to explicitly say it, it tells you what those characters
do.  It's meant to be read by someone with an IQ greater than a
dead fish.

BL> message, and those with SOT/EOT reraders won't see anything
BL> past it. Paul's reader will sayu: "O yes! That's the end of
BL> text," and truncate the message. 

PE> So what? That's your problem of your software not following the
PE> specs? Completely your problem.

BL>   But *my* software does follow the specs. The problem is at the other
BL> end... *your* end.

No, your software does not follow the specs.  The specs say what
a PKT should look like when leaving your system.  YOU are responsible
for ensuring that the combination of software you run meets that
requirement.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---