Hello mark,

On Wednesday March 31 2021 06:35, you wrote to me:

 MvdV>> That depends. In some cases not having it despite the fact that
 MvdV>> it is not formally required is bad.

 ml> i would say "can be bad" instead of "is bad"...

Your words, I call a spade a spade. In the cases it is bad, I call it bad.

 MvdV>> Missing rear vieuw mirrors on motor cycles are detrimental to
 MvdV>> road safety because the biker may miss information about whet
 MvdV>> is going on behing him/her. I say that is bad.

 ml> i've never seen rearview mirrors on racing motorcycles... especially
 ml> dirtbikes...

I thought it would be clear that I meant motor cycles driven on public roads. Requirements like mirrors only apply to vehicles driven on public roads. Sorry for ommitting the fine print in which this was explicitly mentioned.

My point stands: In some cases someting missing that is not a formal requirement is bad. 
Example: motor cycles without rear view mirrors driven on public roads in The Netherlands.

 MvdV>> Missing MSGID is annoying because it breaks the reply chaining,
 MvdV>> I say that is bad.

 ml> this depends on what type of reply chaining is used... some systems
 ml> simply link on subject lines... yes, that may break a reply chain but
 ml> the message should still be linked in with the desired message
 ml> chain...

Subject linking is an inferior method of reply linking. MSGID/REPLY is superior and so that is what many use. Actually it is more a tree than a chain.

My point stands: In some cases someting missing that is not a formal requirement is bad.
Example: Missing MSGID.

 ml> there's both good and bad on both sides of the fence...

That is no excuse for doing something bad.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303