On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Keith Moore wrote:
barf. the last thing we need is for agents to start renaming headers.
I'm afraid we've had that for some time. For example, if I recall
correctly, Pine renames "resent-" header lines if you resend the message
again. It does this, I suspect, because it is impossible to distinguish
between different sets of "resent-" header lines. For example, if you
receive
resent-from: X
resent-to: Y
resent-date: Z
resent-cc: Q
resent-from: A
resent-to: B
to which set do "date:" and "cc:" belong?
Incidentally, one of these days we should perhaps bring the
specification's terminology in line with what everybody actually uses.
Pretty well everybody, when they write "header" mean a single header
line (as you seem to above). The RFC actually calls this a "header
field":
A message consists of header fields (collectively called "the header
of the message") followed, optionally, by a body. The header is a
sequence of lines of characters with special syntax as defined in
this standard.
Note that "the header" is the whole thing. I have been trying to
remember to use "header line" consistently, but the colloquial use of
"header" is so prevalent that I think it's a losing battle (and I tend
to forget sometimes). Also, phrases such as "the From: header line" are
probably felt to be a bit cumbersome, compared with "the From: header".
I propose that next time there's a big revision, we should go with the
current actual usage, and find a new name for the collection of
"headers".
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10(_at_)cus(_dot_)cam(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44
1223 334714.