At 12:43 PM 6/3/2002 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
but I do like list-specific fields better than having lists rewrite
originator-supplied fields.
every now and again, Keith and I agree on something. This is one of them.
(but of course, it did not last for even one entire message...)
And many/most humans can't be bothered, with
> the result that replies often wind up going to *everyone* the MUA will
> allow them to be sent to.
interesting that in the days of paper memos, people could be bothered
to think about such things.
the human factors issues are a tad different. paper did not automatically
fill out the reply fields...
Getting the defaults "right" is a dilemma and, therefore, requires choosing
the kind of error that is least undesireable.
part of the problem is probably (as you said) that the subtle
differences between return-path, from, reply-to, and sender
aren't clear to most email users
The intent was that users should only need to know about From/Reply-to,
with Sender serving as a kind of accountability fall back. Return-path
(and Sender) are intended for the mail handling system, not really for the
recipient user.
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850