In <20041001200449(_dot_)82493(_dot_)qmail(_at_)cr(_dot_)yp(_dot_)to> "D. J.
Bernstein" <djb(_at_)cr(_dot_)yp(_dot_)to> writes:
Bruce Lilly writes:
It appears that MFT proponents cannot agree what it is supposed to do
In fact, all of us are in perfect agreement as to what Mail-Followup-To
does: it replaces To etc. as the default followup target, in exactly the
same way that Reply-To replaces From as the default reply target.
Comments such as ``In this case, Mail-Followup-To includes both of the
crossposted lists'' are simply _examples_ of how senders commonly use
and benefit from Mail-Followup-To. They don't change the _meaning_ of
the field. The Mail-Followup-To field always means the same thing: it
replaces To etc. as the default followup target. Nothing more, nothing
less.`
Yes, but Mail-Followup-To is no use unless it is clear which of the "reply
buttons" causes it to be invoked in preference to From/Reply-To. Jacob
Palme's original draft proposal always presumed that it would somehow be
apparent when a "group reply" was wanted, but the only really satisfactory
way to ensure that is a separate "Reply-to-List" button. Without that,
the MUA is going to have to resort to some rather messy heuristics.
--
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_)clerew(_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