Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl
"Charles Lindsey" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In <[email protected]> "william(at)elan.net" <[email protected]> writes: >On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Charles Lindsey wrote: >> I think that registry is intended for fields that agents might be expected >> to recognize and act upon. I doubt any MUA is going to have a >> built-in-recognition of any and all fields beginning with "Original-". >> Surely they are intended for human consumption, in which case using >> "X-Original-xxxxxx" would he just as good, and would break no rules or >> regisries? >Aren't trace fields like "Received:" intended for human consumption too? :) ALL headers need to be readable by humans upon occasions. But some are not really suitable for reading by other than humans. >And in this case, while its primarily trace data for humans for debugging >it could potentially be used by MTAs, for example to detect complex mail >loop. Besides that some systems might choose to display "Original-Sender" >or "Original-From" in MUA as well (on part with Sender, From, Resent-From, >Resent-Sender when showing the entities involved in email transmission). Well any header that is intended to be used by MTAs needs to be standardized in its own right. What I am doubting is whether any MTA is ever going to be programmed to take some generic action on Original-Foo: headers for all possible values of "Foo". >And its not exactly that it would "break" the registry rule, its just >that currently there is no way to do it and I think that means we'd >have to expand IANA header registry to allow to define certain set of >headers with common prefix or to specifically reserve "prefix" for >use with one type of headers (which are afterward specifically defined). >That generally means either separate draft for IANA or expansion of >RFC3864 (but I really would prefer header prefix registry by on same page >at IANA as specific header names registry). Well if you want to embark upon an enhancement to RFC3834, then I would suggest some preliminary discussion with Graham Klyne. -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: [email protected] Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5