Re: EXCS Comments, In-Reply-To, and References not working

1999-01-19 08:47:27
At 01:27 PM 1/16/99 +0000, Frank J. Perricone wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:11:29 -0500, Al Gilman 

I suggest you try harder digging out the positive approach.  It's in there.

Check out the various predefined resource variables.  You can get From, To,
Subject and Date values and format your own presentation.  Just kill all
the predefined formatting with excs * and roll your own.

I've temporarily given up on other approaches and am trying this, but the
pages for <SUBJECTHEADER> et. al. list various date, from, and subject
fields, but no To field (or CC for that matter).  The same for the main
resource variable page.  I'd guess $TO$, but it's not in the docs or the
mailing list archive anywhere I can find.  Are you sure that it's in there?

Like you, I fail to find $TO$ in the index of variables.

I defined a "variable" in the RC file which was the list posting address
and used that wherever I wanted to create a mailto: which sent mail to [or
a copy to] the list.  The information as to whether the list was in To: or
Cc: as posted, or who the message was To: if not to the list, was not
something I preserved.  For responses I only allowed {list | poster | both
list and poster} and hence did not have an exact "reply to all" which would
incorporate Cc: addresses or additional To: addresses from the prior post.
Given the amout of nuisance generated by accidental "reply to all" on
cross-posted messages, I might even claim "that's not a bug, it's a

These limitations seen appropriate to some degree for mailing list archives.

They are not so appropriate for web-publishing topical mail folders
hand-selected by a recipient without the aid of a mailing list or MLM.  I
also consider that an appropriate use of MHonArc.

We will have to hear from Earl for a definitive answer, but it sure sounds
like for exactly what you want to do, someone has to patch MHonArc to
generate the $TO$.

Harald Alvestrand once opined that Web archivers for Mail or News are "the
wrong architecture."  He felt that a superior architecture would be one
where if you want to read the message you get a verbatim message/rfc822
copy and read it in your mail (or news) tool.

The kinds of feasible-response options discussed above somewhat support his

Has anyone built a service where the index is a web page but the message is
verbatim?  Unfortunately this requires users to know how to install viewers
in their browser, but it would be interesting to know what has been tried
and how well it works.

[more speculation warning] Ah, yes; an application for HTTP content
text/html transliteration of the message or verbatim message/rfc822 could
be at user option.



If not, what's it take to get some help with the <FIELDORDER> tag?  Is
there something wrong about the way I'm asking for help?  Or am I just
being too impatient?

At 06:36 PM 1/14/99 +0000, Frank J. Perricone wrote:

My MHonArc archive for my Crossword PBEM RPG is almost set up to my (for
now) satisfaction, and can be previewed (with lots of very old
messages) at  It's an unusual situation in
that someone else (a former player of the game) is providing the server
space that runs MHonArc and a web server for me, so I'm doing my work
remotely -- writing an rcfile and then emailing it to him.  Makes
slow work since I can't drive the poor fellow mad with constant updates.

I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong with my EXCS block.  Ideally I'd
like to get rid of everything but From, To, Subject, and Date.  But since
EXCS seems to be a negative approach, and I can't find a positive
I have to find every field that might appear and exclude it.  This is what
I have:

<EXCS override>

The in-reply-to, references, and comments fields just will not go away,
though.  I've tried shorter versions, with and without a space afterwards,
and with and without uppercase, though I don't understand why it wouldn't
just simply work.  It seems simple enough.

I searched the archives and found one other person asked the same question
about the in-reply-to and references field, another person just say "works
for me", and the thread ended there.  (At least that part of it.)  Can't
find any reference to this in the docs, FAQ, or anywhere else.

Any ideas?

Version: 2.6.2
Comment: public key: finger hawthorn(_at_)maple(_dot_)sover(_dot_)net, or 
on my web page



* Frank J. Perricone * hawthorn(_at_)sover(_dot_)net *
Just because we aren't all the same doesn't mean we have nothing in common
Just because we have something in common doesn't mean we're all the same

* Frank J. Perricone * hawthorn(_at_)sover(_dot_)net *
Just because we aren't all the same doesn't mean we have nothing in common
Just because we have something in common doesn't mean we're all the same