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

Hector Santos wrote:
>
> Well, it shouldn't be called "Expires" then.  Call it something else. 
>  I like "Color-me-Gray-Date:" <g>
>
> Calling it expires or anything close to it, and intentionally ignoring 
> the complete picture, IMV, will make it highly probable it will be 
> used not as it was intended.  Especially when it is get mixed in with 
> other 2822 expiration concepts - DKIM.
>
A 'color-me-grey-date:' header (or 'only relevant before' or 'pointless 
after' or whatever) would be much more acceptable to me than 'expires' - 
the word 'expires' suggests that it means that the message *expires* 
after that date. When it has expired, it is no longer, it is bereft of 
life, gone to meet its maker etc etc.That's different from 'colored 
grey' (or Norwegian Blue, if that's more acceptable). If you mean 
'expires' use 'expires'. If you mean 'less relevant after' then call the 
header 'less-relevant-after'.

Don't use the wrong header name just because someone else used it ages 
ago for something slightly different and then deprecated it and you want 
to un-deprecate it. Use the right header name, or don't use anything.