From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
Cc: nmh-workers@math.gatech.edu, exmh-users@sunlabs.Eng.Sun.COM,
ding@gnus.org
Subject: Re: Mail-{Reply,Followup}-To considered harmful
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 10:15:01 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19144.887238901@munnari.OZ.AU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Richard Coleman's message of "Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:19:30 -0500."
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:19:30 -0500
From: Richard Coleman <coleman@math.gatech.edu>
Message-ID: <199802112219.RAA12647@math34.math.gatech.edu>
| I also believe this proposal is a good way of fixing this problem. The
| problem is the existence or absence of a single header is not enough
| information. That is the reason the Reply-To header is typically implemented
| in a way that goes against RFC-822 in certain cases.
Not that it really matters why, but I doubt this. RFC-822 on reply-to is
just almost hopeless. The reason people do what they do is more likely
because they saw someone else doing that, and imagined it was correct,
and copied - perhaps slightly varying things along the way.
| Since the Reply-To header is interpreted differently by different people,
| fixing this situation is impossible at this time. That is why the proposal
| offers two new header fields "Mail-Reply-To" and "Mail-Followup-To".
It is possible to write sensible useful semantics for a single reply-to
type header field (whatever it is called). They won't necessarily do
everything everyone wants, but sane and internally consistent and complete
they would be.
Two header fields only generates confusion. It tackles a different problem
and doesn't solve all of it. It would be OK if there truly were exactly
two different kinds of replies people might like to make, and while those two
may cover 90% of the cases, they don't cover all. That is, this solution
cannot be complete, it doesn't really solve any problem at all.
kre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-02-11 23:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <199802111920.OAA21297@spot.cs.utk.edu>
1998-02-11 22:19 ` Richard Coleman
1998-02-11 23:15 ` Robert Elz [this message]
1998-02-11 23:43 ` Perry E. Metzger
1998-02-13 6:37 ` Keith Moore
1998-02-13 16:00 ` cwg-dated-4706b1d0ee55baea
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=19144.887238901@munnari.OZ.AU \
--to=kre@munnari.oz.au \
--cc=ding@gnus.org \
--cc=exmh-users@sunlabs.Eng.Sun.COM \
--cc=nmh-workers@math.gatech.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).