Re: Experiment #3 with multiple Reference headers

In <[email protected]> Frank Ellermann <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:


>If I'd really want to mix the ideas of See-Also (= literal
>sense of references) and References, then I'd probably identify
>one thread as _the_ thread, copy its References adding a msg-id
>as explained in 2822, and then I'd add the Message-IDs of any
>further "see also" references.  Maybe with a limit of at most
>14 additional references, because that still allows 3+3 msg-ids
>for _the_ thread.  OTOH that sounds like an idea for a time
>travel to 1995, too little and too late today. ;-)  Bye, Frank

Yes, if having two References headers turns out not to be feasible, then
having one References header plus some number of secondary References
headers with some different name (I don't think I would want to use
See-Also for the purpose) would be another way out.

But all the reports so far (not a representtive sample, to be sure)
indicate that no harm arises from multiple References headers (i.e. they
progagate, and are interpreted as well as could be hoped for).

-- 
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