In <2147483647(_dot_)1013016964(_at_)socrates(_dot_)cyrusoft(_dot_)com> Cyrus
Daboo <daboo(_at_)cyrusoft(_dot_)com> writes:
Yes indeed! I've already seen instances of a client that emits
'Thread-Topic' and 'Thread-Index' headers that I can't find described
anywhere. These are clearly meant to be an attempt to do some form of smart
message threading, which is fine except that it doesn't use In-Reply-To or
References, which is what rfc2822 suggests. So is this an attempt to
deprecate the use of In-Reply-To and References? This illustrates Keith's
point: should someone be allowed to register a header and state in the
description that this is meant to deprecate an IETF standard header?
It certainly shows that there needs to be a mechanism in place for the
IESG (area director/expert) to pull the plug smartly.
Whilst such a power is clearly necessary, I doubt it would actually need
to be used all that often.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5