[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl

2005-01-16 14:57:16

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

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 

   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

Philip Hazel            University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10(_at_)cus(_dot_)cam(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 
1223 334714.

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