1.1 --- a/discussion.roff	Sun Jul 15 19:16:35 2012 +0200
     1.2 +++ b/discussion.roff	Sun Jul 15 19:46:35 2012 +0200
     1.3 @@ -8,8 +8,7 @@
     1.4  .P
     1.5  This discussion compares the present version of mmh with the state of
     1.6  nmh at the time when the mmh project had started, i.e. fall 2011.
     1.7 -Recent changes in nmh are seldom part of the discussion.
     1.8 -Sometimes they are mentioned in side notes.
     1.9 +Recent changes in nmh are rarely part of the discussion.
    1.10  .P
    1.11  For the reader's convenience, the structure of modern email systems
    1.12  is depicted in the following figure.
    1.13 @@ -49,8 +48,8 @@
    1.14  The dashed boxes represent entities that usually reside on single machines.
    1.15  The box on the lower left represents the sender's system.
    1.16  The box on the upper left represents the first mail transfer node.
    1.17 -The box on the upper right represents the transfer node responsible for the
    1.18 -destination address.
    1.19 +The box on the upper right represents the transfer node responsible
    1.20 +for the destination address.
    1.21  The box on the lower right represents the recipient's system.
    1.22  Often, the boxes above the dotted line are servers on the Internet.
    1.23  Many mail clients, including nmh, include all of the components below
    1.24 @@ -192,9 +191,9 @@
    1.25  As it had already been possible to use an external MSA and MRA,
    1.26  why should the internal version not be kept for convenience?
    1.27  .\" XXX commas correct?
    1.28 -Transfered to a different area,
    1.29 -the question whether there is sense in having a fall-back pager in all
    1.30 -the command line tools, for the cases when
    1.31 +Transfered to a different area, the question,
    1.32 +whether there is sense in having a fall-back pager in all
    1.33 +the command line tools for the cases when
    1.34  .Pn more
    1.35  or
    1.36  .Pn less
    1.37 @@ -228,10 +227,10 @@
    1.38  .Pn /bin/mail
    1.39  had covered everything there was to email and still was small and simple.
    1.40  Later, the essential complexity of email increased.
    1.41 -(Essential complexity is the complexity defined by the problem itself.\&
    1.42 +(Essential complexity is the complexity defined by the problem itself
    1.43  .[ [
    1.44  brooks no silver bullet
    1.45 -.]])
    1.46 +.]].)
    1.47  Consequently, email systems grew.
    1.48  RFCs started to introduce the concept of mail agents to separate the
    1.49  various roles because they became more extensive and because
    1.50 @@ -2222,7 +2221,7 @@
    1.51  .Pn mhshow 's
    1.52  behavior to the modern view on the topic.
    1.53  .P
    1.54 -(One should note that this section completely ignores the original
    1.55 +One should note that this section completely ignores the original
    1.56  .Pn show
    1.57  program, because it was not capable to display MIME messages
    1.58  and is no longer part of mmh.
    1.59 @@ -2233,7 +2232,7 @@
    1.60  .Pn show
    1.61  in mmh, this section uses the name
    1.62  .Pn mhshow ,
    1.63 -in order to avoid confusion.)
    1.64 +in order to avoid confusion.
    1.65  .P
    1.66  In mmh, the basic idea is that
    1.67  .Pn mhshow

     2.1 --- a/mail.bib	Sun Jul 15 19:16:35 2012 +0200
     2.2 +++ b/mail.bib	Sun Jul 15 19:46:35 2012 +0200
     2.3 @@ -56,5 +56,6 @@
     2.4  %J nmh-workers mailing list
     2.5  %T Understanding nmh (aka. What's the goal)
     2.6  %D November 30 2010
     2.7 +%C Message-ID: \fU<1PNSw4-12C-00@\:serveme.schnalke.local>\fP
     2.8  %O \fU http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2010-11/msg00193.html
     2.9