Gmail eats Python

[Ian Kelly]

On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> wrote:
> On 25Jul2015 22:43, Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2015 4:51 PM, "Ben Finney" <ben+python at benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> Laura Creighton <lac at openend.se> writes:
>>> > So it was my fault by sending him a reply with >>> to the far left.
>>>
>>> No, it was Google Mail's failt for messing with the content of the
>>> message.
>
>
> Specificly, by manking the text without leave(*).
>
>> What Internet standard is being violated by reflowing text content in
>> the message body?
>
>
> RFC3676: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcmarkup?doc=3676
> See also: http://joeclark.org/ffaq.html

Thanks for the link. However, this only describes how reflowing is
permitted on Format=Flowed messages. Both the message in question and
the message it replied to omitted the Format parameter, which per the
linked RFC makes them Format=Fixed by default. I can't find any
standard discussing how Format=Fixed messages may or may not be
reflowed when quoted.

The > character that is commonly used as a prefix by virtually all (?)
MUAs is also a form of mangling. As far as I know, it is not an
Internet standard, just common convention (RFC 3676 specifies it, but
again only for Format=Flowed plain text). Is there some standard I'm
not aware of that permits quoting but forbids reflowing?

Note that RFC 5322 recommends a line length limit of 78 characters and
requires a limit of 998 characters, so in a sufficiently long
exchange, reflowing would eventually become necessary.