In <01K941LJAZ10000GV2(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com>
ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com writes:
But an RFC that defined Precedence properly, set out the approved usages
and deprecated the rest as obsolete might solve the problem.
And in the case of precedence, even if you eliminate the usage that doesn't
belong in a header field (control over delay notifications), you still have two
different camps with incompatible views of how the field should be used
(in X.400 terms, priority versus importance).
Each case on its merits. It may be that thje Precedence header is too far
gone to be recoverable (I haven't studied the gory details). But there
will certainly be some headers which are recoverable in that way. For
example, the Mail-Copies-To header has some redundant usages. IN Usefor,
we have chosen one and deprecated the others (but at least the bad ones do
no actual harm in that case, so they will just hopefully fade away over
time).
--
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