On Sat May 28 2005 00:07, Paul Jakma wrote:
It's not clear enough though. Eg, lets just quote from the example
2822 gives:
Last time I counted, there were about a dozen examples in 2822. Anyway:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mary Smith <mary(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
To: John Doe <jdoe(_at_)machine(_dot_)example>
Reply-To: "Mary Smith: Personal Account" <smith(_at_)home(_dot_)example>
Subject: Re: Saying Hello
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 10:01:10 -0600
Message-ID: <3456(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
In-Reply-To: <1234(_at_)local(_dot_)machine(_dot_)example>
References: <1234(_at_)local(_dot_)machine(_dot_)example>
This is a reply to your hello.
----
Note the "Reply-To:" field in the above message. When John
replies
to Mary's message above, the reply should go to the address in the
"Reply-To:" field instead of the address in the "From:" field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly this example shows how 'Reply-To' can be used to suggest that
author prefers replies to go to their smith(_at_)home(_dot_)example mailbox
rather than their mary(_at_)example(_dot_)net mailbox.
Perfectly legal. When there are multiple ways to do the same thing,
and there are no reasons to prefer one over the others...
Where things go wrong is when MUAs try to respond to the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mary Smith <mary(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
To: John Doe <jdoe(_at_)machine(_dot_)example>
Cc: Example list <list(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
Reply-To: "Mary Smith: Personal Account" <smith(_at_)home(_dot_)example>,
Example list <list(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
Subject: Re: Saying Hello
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 10:01:10 -0600
Message-ID: <3456(_at_)example(_dot_)net>
In-Reply-To: <1234(_at_)local(_dot_)machine(_dot_)example>
References: <1234(_at_)local(_dot_)machine(_dot_)example>
This is a mail to you and the list
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of MUAs will reply to both list(_at_)example(_dot_)net and
smith(_at_)home(_dot_)example for 'reply'.
That's what the author suggested for responses. Why do you say
"things go wrong"?
IIRC a suggestion was floated in that last discussion you pointed me
at, from circa august last year, that the From field should always be
set to the author's preferred mailbox for replies to the author.
Yes, for each individual author who has a mailbox, and who does not
require anonymity. There is of course nothing in the current specification
to prevent that.
Would it be an idea to act on this suggestion?
1. Specifically, more implementations supporting MFT.
Nobody has yet produced a coherent suggestion along those lines that
gained any sort of consensus. Keith Moore identified a number of serious
problems with MFT. So it's highly unlikely.