Re: mail-followup-to / mail-copies-to
Paul Jakma <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 28 May 2005, Bruce Lilly wrote:
> You claimed that it was perceived to be a problem based on a
> misinterpretation of the meaning of Reply-To as "private". The
> problem is with that misinterpretation (apparently yours).
No, I'm just trying to point out some of the real-world ambiguity
around use of Reply-To. The example in 2822 shows the problem, so
please stop claiming there is no problem.
> Unlikely to happen -- it is a legitimate use and may be appropriate
> in some contexts.
Perfect.
> Oh, it was supposed to be a footnote? If you meant restricting use of
> Reply-To, no, I don;t think it would be appropriate.
Fine, in that case if the meaning of Reply-To can *not* be made more
specific, it's not suitable for list usage. In which case some other
solution is needed. Eg, 'Foo-Copy-Me'.
("There shouldn't be a way to indicate desire to be copied on list
replies" is an /answer/ but not a solution).
regards,
--
Paul Jakma [email protected] [email protected] Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel.