In <E9190DB0-0787-11D9-9556-000393DB5366(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
Where did you get the idea that Mail-Followup-To communicates anything
other than this?
your web page on the subject talks about setting MFT automatically, in
order to suppress duplicate replies. and that seems to be by far the
most common use of MFT.
I also doubt that it's reasonable to use a single header field to
communicate preferences for group replies, because the recipient may
need to act differently depending on _why_ that field was set, and the
recipient's UA may need to act differently (say to alert the recipient
to an exceptional condition) depending on why that field was set. But
I'm still thinking about this.
But the MFT field is clearly _capable_ of dealing with a variety of
sitations, and since all these situations are going to arise then that
would appear to be a Good Thing.
Now if you want it to be evident which particular situation applies in
each case (because users may want to modify their responses accordingly),
then that is a reasonable request, and it could be tackled in various
ways, such as:
1. Invent Yet-Another-header-field
2. Add additional features to an existing field (e.g. to MFT or Reply-To),
which can be further subdivided into:
2a. Fit it into existing syntax (e.g. group syntax or comments)
2b. Add new syntax (e.g. MIME-style parameters); could hardly be added
to Reply-To, but could be OK for MFT which is not yet standardized.
Examples:
Mail-Followup-To:
LIST:ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org,ietf-usefor(_at_)imc(_dot_)org;,
AUTHOR:Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>;,
LIST-OWNER:<phoffman(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>;,
CC:"Scott Hollenbeck" <sah(_at_)428cobrajet(_dot_)net>
Reply-To: Mary Jones <mary(_at_)example(_dot_)com> (my secretary)
Mail-Followup-To: ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org,ietf-usefor(_at_)imc(_dot_)org,
Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>,<phoffman(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>.
"Scott Hollenbeck" <sah(_at_)428cobrajet(_dot_)net>;
reason="multiple-lists,author"; added-by=list-maintainer
Note that MIME-style syntax is appealing insofar as it is extensible
(allowing for x-tokens if registerd tokens are insufficient to the need),
but it is probably not wise in a context where <address>es are used, on
account of parsing difficulties.
--
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_)clerew(_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