Re: (lack of) message header field ordering

On Sun March 13 2005 17:49, Tony Finch wrote:

> It might make sense to define a subset of the header field name space
> which can be used by these fields, by analogy with Resent-*.
It might make sense to put transport-related additions
(trace fields, List- fields, etc.) in a separate place ("envelope")
distinct from the end-to-end, user-to-user message header
(date, to/from/cc, subject, etc.).

Either way, it's something different from what we have now.