On 10/5/07, Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> wrote:
>
> On Oct 5, 2007, at 9:05 , Bill Bartlett wrote:
> * Given it's an X- header, doesn't that mean the meaning of the value
> is implementation dependent? What's "bogus" wrt Outlook may not be
> wrt another mail system or client
> * Doesn't this indicate that Outlook is broken (for some values of
> broken)?
Ummm. Given that some may contain the group all, I guess that's
technically correct. :)
It's not the only area in which Lookout! make it obvious it's broken.