Subj : Re: Max subject length: 71 or 72 chars?
To : Ward Dossche
From : Carol Shenkenberger
Date : Fri Oct 11 2019 04:34 pm
Re: Re: Max subject length: 71 or 72 chars?
By: Ward Dossche to Rob Swindell on Tue Aug 27 2019 05:01 pm
> Hi Rob,
>
> RS> I'm pointing out the issues with the "subject" definition. Did you want
> RS> me to quote the entire spec?
>
> Oh dear ...
>
> Something was clear for all the developers since 1990, there were a lot of
> them, and now suddenly it's an issue?
>
> RS> > And do you also know where the "71" comes from ?
>
> RS> Well, I took 72 and subtracted 1 (for the required null byte). I assume
> RS> the 72 came from 36 (the total length of the to and from fields)
> RS> multiplied by 2. Is there some other significance of 71 that I'm not
> RS> aware of?
>
> My IT experience starts somewhere in the very late 1960, punchcard heaven.
>
> A punch card had 80 columns, 1-71 were used for coding statements, 72 was th
> continuation column if something didn't fit in 71 positions, then it continu
> on the next card, 73-80 contained the sequence number of that card in the wh
> deck of punch cards.
>
> It's not certain but my bet is the 71 comes from there, someone's
> knowledge/experience embedded in punchcard technology.
>
> Just like the old length of the system name limited to 51 or 52 or something
> It also finds its origin in programming techniques from days gone by ... I
> think.
>
> \%/@rd
>
FYI, it may be a replication of old ARPANET where the 'chat' was limited to 71
characters and a return. Yeah, I go back a ways.
xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)
