jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se (Jacob Palme) wrote on 11.12.98 in
<v04011703b296bffec6c3(_at_)[198(_dot_)67(_dot_)177(_dot_)140]>:
At 16.36 +0100 98-12-10, Pete Resnick wrote:
No, that's wrong. First of all, we're not going to talk about "mail
items" in someone's "mailbox"; those aren't terms used anywhere in
this document. Second, there may or not be any messages in the
Originator's "mailbox" when this decision is made, and the existence
of such may or may not indicate the need for a new message id. If I'm
forwarding a message with some edits in it, it might be a good idea
to use a new message-id, even if I preserve the originator and date
fields for the convenience of my recipient.
A good example where you would need "Supersedes".
An example where you most certainly wouldn't want to use "Supersedes".
MfG Kai