Date: 4 Sep 2015 03:51 pm (UTC)
simont: (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
Ah, I remembered adding that to Net at someone's indirect request, but not whose. But also, now I look at that user icon rather than the one at the top of this post, I recognise you :-)

Certainly if you convert "." lines into "..", then you have to convert ".." lines in turn to something else, and that in turn and so on, otherwise you end up with some line contents which can either represent itself or be an escaped version of a different line, meaning the unstuffer doesn't know which one to turn it back into.

But yes, they could perfectly well have ruled that dot-stuffing applied to any line consisting of one or more dots and nothing else, rather than to any line starting with a dot even if a non-dot follows it. As long as the policy is consistent between all implementations, either (or many points in between) would work fine. I suppose they must have decided that mandating the very easiest of the options would give the best chance of nobody messing it up, and "dot-stuff any line starting with a dot" is plausibly that.
From:
Anonymous
OpenID
Identity URL: 
User
Account name:
Password:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
Subject:
HTML doesn't work in the subject.

Message:

 
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.

Profile

me_and: (Default)
Adam

December 2015

M T W T F S S
 123456
7 8910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Style Credit