Re: Intent to revive "expires" header from draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-15

Michael Welzl <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.rfc822
Organization University of Innsbruck
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 11:20 +0100, Paul Smith wrote:
> Chris Haynes wrote:
> > 2) Can the semantics of an 'expired' message be agreed and communicated in a clean, simplistic, non-technical way?
> >   
> I'm not sure they can be expressed in any way at all... All I can figure 
> out so far is that the expiry of a message implies it's possibly not 
> quite as important, urgent or valid to the 
> sender/recipient/some-other-person as it would have been before it expired.
> 
> I'm not sure that's a tight enough definition :)

I think that this is as good as it gets. In a previous email, I wrote:

> "it becomes less important after that date because it is somehow
> bound to it".

which has the same meaning. We automatically agree on this meaning
because it's obvious, so defining it cleanly shouldn't be too difficult.

Cheers,
Michael
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.