On Sep 5, 2007, at 2:30 AM, Michael W. Ryder wrote:

> James Edward Gray II wrote:
>> On Sep 4, 2007, at 5:40 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
>>> The only argument against it that I've seen that might convince  
>>> me is the
>>> one that relates to forum and newsgroup gateways.  Too bad all  
>>> that has
>>> happened there is someone said it *might* be a problem, and  
>>> nobody has
>>> confirmed it.
>> I'm done with this no-longer-civil-conversation, but I need to add  
>> a note about the above as it might be relevant to any decision made.
>> I watch over the newsgroup gateway and I can say that it would not  
>> be affected.  It uses the headers to do it's magic, because I feel  
>> that's more reliable.  The gateway existed back when the numbers  
>> were still around and it could do so again, though it has been  
>> rewritten since then.
>> I cannot speak for the other forums, of course.
>> James Edward Gray II
> I notice that some messages are still not being propagated properly  
> through the gateway.  Is this still a function of the message  
> type?  I think I remember something about HTML causing problems.

Correct.  I explain the rules at:

http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/what_is_the_ruby_talk_gateway

> For example, the first message of this thread was not propagated,  
> just the reply from Matz.

Here's the relevant header from that message:

   Content-Type: 	multipart/alternative;  boundary="----
   =_Part_6558_27473787.1188773304382"

James Edward Gray II