Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt]
2004-09-04 17:20:10
It sounds like you're making the assumption that there are two types
of
reply (individual and to-all), and Reply-To should be used to send
them to
the appropriate location with the only difference being whether
people in
the To and Cc headers are included.
No, the assumption I'm making is that the message author(s) know(s)
where he wants plain replies (as opposed to reply-to-all) to go and is
capable of setting Reply-To accordingly.
Perhaps, but that's nearly useless, as there's no way to encourage
users to use "plain reply".
As it's implemented today, Reply-to is little more than a surrogate
From. Actually, we would probably be better off without it - because
adding reply-to to a message results in less predictable behavior on
the part of the recipient.
Now it happens to be the case that most MUAs have two types of reply
functions corresponding to the two cases.
Both of which do the wrong thing. "plain reply" should probably be
(and be labeled) "reply to author". The other "reply" (call it "group
reply") should probably have some way of excluding recipients that, for
whatever reason, should not receive replies. It might be the case that
"group reply" should be the default, though this would probably be too
big a departure from existing behavior.
The use that you're making of Reply-To works fine for individual
e-mail,
but when used in the list context, it breaks private reply.
No. regardless of how Reply-To is set, anyone can easily copy-and-paste
an address, or call it up from an address book, etc.
For most of the MUAs I've seen, "easily" is a huge stretch. First, the
recipient composing the reply has to notice that reply-to is set. this
is difficult because few MUAs bother to provide any kind of alert to
this effect. Many MUAs don't even display reply-to fields when viewing
a message. Copying and pasting is not necessarily easy even if the
recipient notices - especially on systems where you have to click a
window to select it, where clicking also raises the window and buries
other windows. I've even see cases where copying an address and
pasting in another window *of the same app* didn't paste the same text
that was copied. Now maybe that's just an isolated bug, but in my
experience with windows, macosx, and X11 systems - copy and paste
basically sucks on all of them. Then there are of course systems where
copy and paste doesn't exist.
Keith
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], (continued)
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Russ Allbery
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bruce Lilly
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Russ Allbery
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bruce Lilly
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Kai Henningsen
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt],
Keith Moore <=
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bruce Lilly
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bruce Lilly
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bruce Lilly
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Simon Josefsson
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Charles Lindsey
- Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Simon Josefsson
|
|
|