(Previous discussion continued)
Re: REply to address for SERIALST Eric Celeste 24 Oct 1991 15:46 UTC

Re: REply to address for SERIALST Eric Celeste 24 Oct 1991 15:46 UTC

One more thought on the replying problem. It seems that one common
theme I've found is that lists with _short_ descriptions do not have
this problem while lists with _long_ descriptions do suffer from bad
address errors on some systems. This may be because the long
description forces the list address (in angle brackets) down to the
next line on some systems. Later, when the user tries to reply, their
system assumes that the line break represents the start of a new
address. Thus, mail bounces because the description (which was on a
line of its own) is treated as an address--and it does not make a very
good one!  Whew! :)

SOLUTION: Keep list descriptions brief. The total of the label
"Sender: " and the description and the address should equal less than
80 characters (75 to be safe). Perhaps SERIALST can be described as
"SERIALS in libraries discussion" instead of "SERIALST: SERIALS in
libraries - A user discussion group"?

...Eric