Re: mail-followup-to / mail-copies-to

In <[email protected]> Paul Jakma <[email protected]> writes:

>On Mon, 30 May 2005, Charles Lindsey wrote:

>> In <[email protected]> Bruce Lilly 
>> <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> As another, not uncommon, example, consider a message posted to a 
>>> mailing list with a request by the author to send off-list (only) 
>>> responses, to be summarized by the author.  The author could 
>>> easily indicate that with Reply-To, and every response that is 
>>> directed "where the author suggested" will comply with that.  For 
>>> such a mailing list message, your "list context" would send a 
>>> doubly wrong response -- it wouldn't go directly to the author (as 
>>> requested) and would go to the entire list (contrary to the 
>>> request).

>Note btw that "list context" isn't my idea, it's simply what a few 
>MUAs in the field already /do/. (Indeed, at least one simply ignores 
>all cues in the mail being replied to for a "list reply", other than 
>MFT).

>The problem isn't so much in 'my' "list context", but in the 
>problematic /deployed/ MUA functionality.

>> That is exactly the sort of situation that MFT is supposed to deal 
>> with. In the absence of MFT, then using the List-Post address is 
>> the right thing when "Replying-to-List". But if MFT is present, it 
>> should override the List-Post. There might even be a 'list' keyword 
>> in the MFT header to mean reply to List-Post (to be used in 
>> addition to the sender's address if he want replies both to the 
>> list and himself).

>I'm not sure about MFT, it seems as vague and broad (and hence as 
>problematic) as Reply-To is.

Which is why there needs to be a standard to declare exactly what it is
supposed to do and not to do.

>It seems to me that supplying information which is as specific and 
>indisputably true as possible is better than supplying vague 
>"suggestions", which may be too broad in their scope to be able to 
>provide . Eg:

>"Suggest that Replies go To <a>, <b>, etc.."

>and

>"Suggest that Follow-ups go To ...."

Sure. But a proper MFT standard would state clearly who the reply was to
go to (subject to user override) in all the possible combinations of
List-Post fields, MFT fields, Reply-To fields, etc that could arise.

-- 
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