[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Multi-message reply and "References:"

2003-06-19 04:58:22

At 20:20 18/06/03 -0400, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
The only downside I can see to this proposal (and indeed, it is
potentially a problem with Pete's original proposal) is that the length
of the Threads header (or the References header in Pete's case) can get
long.  Is there going to be a problem with MTAs truncating the header?
Maybe, but I think I'd take a wait and see attitude.  A recent study of
ours (of ~42000 messages across 8 users) shows that 8010021331513f email
threads (old-fashioned ones, not Pete's fancy ones) are 5 or fewer
nodes.  The 97 0x4046acfcoint was at 16 nodes.

Just a random thought...

if one assumes that some of the thread information may be available from earlier messages, and that an application that seriously uses this information will also have access to the earlier messages, is there scope here for collapsing burgeoning historic thread information into a hash that can be used to confirm the sending agent's knowledge of the threads in progress.

Maybe that's overkill: if an agent supplies just recent generation thread history in any message it sends, I think the complete thread structure can be assembled from the various messages.

Now I'll return to my normal programming...


Graham Klyne
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E