At 17:23 04/02/22 -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
Good point. But it is not really restricted to lists. There are
other potential applications, which are not related to mailing lists.
So starting with List-* would be confusing.
Maybe it should only start with List- when added by a list.
Although I expect this header to mostly be used in connection
with mailing lists, the archiving functionality is really not
at all tied to mailing lists. Also, what would be the benefit
of having Archived-At and List-Archived-At for the user who
wants to find an archived copy of the message?
In our implementation, the URI you get with Archived-At is
completely independent of any particular mailing list, and
is the same for all mailing lists in case of cross-posting.
I don't even know whether the header is added once when the
email comes into our mailing list system, or it is added
independently for each mailing list. Indeed, my guess is
that it's something in the middle. If we had been able to
tightly integrate the email sending and the archiving
process, we wouldn't have needed the MID redirection.
But it seems like we're finding more and more cases where it's a bad idea
to have a header field without very clear rules on who is allowed to set
that field. We've seen this with Reply-To and Sender and also with Carl
Malamud's Solicitation field proposal.
These are certainly good examples. But I think there is a difference
between a header that can be added several times (as the Archived-At
header) and a header that can only be added once (as I think is the
case with the above examples).
Or in other words: The rules are very clear, anybody who archives
the message can add an Archived-At header, and nobody should
overwrite existing ones. I clarified this in the draft.
Being able to access the archived message from IMAP is potentially a lot
better, but (as with many things) even IMAP needs some tweaking to make it
work well for this.
Very good idea. I have mentioned this in the draft. I thought
that the IMAP URI scheme only allows to address folders,
but that's not at all the case.
Regards, Martin.