ml> which type 2 format requires a tearline?? none that i know of... 

DM> FTS-0004 requires a tear line.

ml> suggest you read it again and look specifically for the word
"required"
ml> in the paragraphs that describe the tearline and it's implementation...

It doesn't use that word.  It uses the equivalent words "*is*
near", "optional for *most*", and inserted for
"*COMPLETE COMPATIBILITY*".

As far as ambiguous specs are concerned, this is one of the lesser
ambiguous ones.  It is obvious that you should be inserting one. CERTAINLY
there is no disadvantage of erring on the side of caution. BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---