[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Please thread the discussion

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Chris Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 13:57:12 -0600
Message-id: <20071106195712.GE29098@xxxxxxxx>
On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 10:03:20AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> ...
> If the software that formulates the message's headers doesn't respect
> the standard and include proper Message-Id and In-Reply-To headers,
> something as simple as changing the subject (as Peter did in his
> latest reply) will break threading (fallback threading basedon the
> Subject header, i.e.). If, on the other hand, the mail software _does_
> support the standard, changing the Subject will _not_ break threading.
> Surely as software professionals we can agree that standards are
> generally a good thing and that this standard is no exception to that
> rule. Shouldn't we thus conclude that using non-conformant software is
> to be strongly discouraged?    (01)

Sounds right to me.  Is there a list of conformant/nonconformant clients
somewhere, or a simple way to tell one from the other?  I mostly use
mutt, which I would bet big money is comformant, and OS X's Mail.app,
which I'd *suspect* is conformant, but I just don't know.     (02)

> Definitely a pet peeve of mine...    (03)

No kidding? :-)    (04)

-chris    (05)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>