Julian Mehnle writes:
Dick St.Peters wrote:
Subject: Successes and failures of the SPF project in 2005
This sub-thread has become about what SenderID calls a scope.
Points it out and then doesn't change the subject. *sigh*
Please change the subject when you change the subject. Please!
Sigh ... I observe that the subject is drifting off course and end my
post by trying to yank it back, and Julian chooses me to holler at.
Yes, Subject headers should be changed when a new topic is introduced,
but topics don't have clean boundaries and most threads drift. This
case is an example:
- Frank described SenderID's spf2.0/mfrom as "non-existing"
- I challenged that and happened to use "scope" in my post
- Frank said mfrom isn't a scope, it's an identity
- I pointed out spf2.0/mfrom is called a scope in the SenderID draft
Where was a new subject introduced? Arguably each of these posts
started a new subject, and just as arguably none of them did. Anybody
using a Subject-based threaded reader would have had a hard time
following the discussion if any of these posts had changed the Subject
header.
--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com