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

On Tue, 31 May 2005, Charles Lindsey wrote:

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

Yes, but just conceptually it's quite a broad concept.

Given the current state of things wrt Reply-To and MUA behaviour i 
think "Do no harm" should be a major factor. Adding scope for further 
ambiguity and/or diverging MUA behaviour is worse than present 
situation.

> 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.

Given previous discussion, it seems unlikely it could ever become a 
standard header though.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	[email protected]	[email protected]	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
The poetry of heroism appeals irresitably to those who don't go to a war,
and even more so to those whom the war is making enormously wealthy."
 		-- Celine