ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MUA Mail Options for a Mailing List [was Re: non-member messages to lists]

2004-10-15 07:53:57

On Tue October 12 2004 23:04, Hector Santos wrote:

        "Reply to Sender"

You are in danger of confusing yourself (or of being
confused by non-standard terminology used by your
MUA); you probably mean "Author(s)", though it is
conceivable that some respondents might wish to
communicate with a message sender (as indicated
by the Sender field if present, or via the envelope
sender).

        "Reply to All"

and how these two MUA "standard" reply actions are handled or "prepared" by
list handlers.

They aren't; responses are generated by a respondent,
usually with an MUA -- the mailing list expander is not
involved in that process.
 
I mean, lets take a step back and understand the the list concept is still
based on a email concept.

OK so far, if we don't get literal.

So to help facilate the MUA, the list handler 
should prepare the headers to best provide the most meaningful or correct
behavior as expected by the user.

Message headers' fields set by authors or whose
semantics are reserved for authors' use should not
be modified by list expanders.

The problem as I see it is that we have a standard for 1-1 (direct) email
messages, but no standard for a list distribution to handle the above two
reply options.

Incorrect. In fact mailing lists predate email, initial
electronic equivalents of mailing lists (using FTP MAIL)
predate MTP and SMTP, and the text message format
that was developed in those days and which has
evolved slightly to its current format explicitly provides
for mailing lists; it has done so since RFC 724 (possibly
earlier).  The format began with RFC 561 more than
three decades ago , specifically to address issues with
mailing lists.  SMTP itself has explicit provisions for
mailing lists.

In one case (the list server used here), the "Reply to Sender" will go to
the author.  In our list server, the "Reply to Sender" goes to the list
address.

There's that problem with use of non-standard terminology.
 
I guess the difference is that we make sure the "Reply-To:" address is
properly set in the distribution.

Is that more correct?

No. Its use is reserved for the author to indicate where he
wishes responses to be sent.
 
[more problems based on non-standard terminology elided]
Unfortunately, atleast with Outlook the "Reply to All" does not grab 
the "From:" address.

Sure it does -- the problem is that in your case something
has overridden it by setting the Reply-To field.

In this regard, I would say our list server makes it more difficult to send
direct.  The user has to understand whats going on and copy and paste the
From: address from the message properties.

That's a problem with that specific MUA.
 
So I think maybe it may help us to get to a point where we might want to
outline design requirements for a modern MUA  to better understands a
mailing list?

There isn't much specific to lists; certainly some UAs
are poorly implemented (incorrect terminology, failure to
provide convenient access to message content, failure to
provide some functionality, etc.). Those implementation
issues affect usability for all messages.

a) Does a MUA need to detect a Mailing List Message as oppose to a just a
pure email message?

No, and in general it cannot do so.
 
c) What are the most desirable reply/new mail options for a mailing list?

    Reply to List (very similar to a news Reply To Group idea)?

There is no general mechanism to identify a list, messages
may be sent to multiple lists, etc.

    Reply to Directly to Author?

Probably yes -- many UAs do provide that functionality.

    Reply to All?

Probably yes as a catch-all.
 
Is that enough?

Probably not; there should be a function to respond to where
the author has requested responses to go.  Generally that is
labeled simply "Reply" in UAs.

How about follow ups? 
[...]
Does that make sense?

No. How did you intend "follow up" to differ from "reply"
(which in any case would be more accurately be called
"respond")?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>