[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Resent- fields

2005-01-19 02:15:47

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Bruce Lilly wrote:

No, "header" in the mail standards has a very clear meaning:

I entirely agree. However, I observe that there is very widespread 
misuse of this terminology, leading to possible confusion.

Your proposal, which is to replace precise,
well-defined terms with poorly-defined colloquialisms, would
have a negative effect on interoperability and on general
understanding of messages and messaging protocols.

It was a point for discussion, not a formal proposal, and as such it 
succeeded. :-) If, however, I had been making a formal proposal, it 
would have been to replace precise, well-defined but frequently 
misunderstood terms with new, equally precise, equally well-defined, but 
less likely to be misused or misunderstood terms. However, I didn't 
actually expect anything to happen other than there to be a discussion, 
which at least raises the point in people's minds.


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