Re: Proposal: new alternatives links
On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 10:43:42AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 18-Aug-01, 07:07 (CDT), Anand Kumria <wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au> wrote:
> > If you set Reply-To, like I have, to the destination where you'd like
> > mail to be sent you have a greater chance of people respecting your
> > preference.
>
> That's not what Reply-To is for. The Reply-To address is for personal,
> non-list mail.
No, to quote RFC2822 (similiar language is in 822 as well):
"When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates
the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests
that replies be sent."
> If I set Reply-To to the list address, then I encourage
> inadvertant distribution of private mail to the list.
That is only the case if you have a poorly-designed mail user agent (MUA)
with a crummy interface. Default configurations of mutt are a good
example.
A better way to do the reply interface would be via a menu so that you
can select which address (sender, from, reply-to, etc.) you want to
send back to without difficulty. exmh is a MUA which does this.
> Newsreaders have long distinguished private "replies" from public
> "followups"; with the decline of USENET as a useful discussion forum,
> and the increase in the use of mailling lists, MUAs need to do likewise.
True, but you also have to realise that all these headers are merely
indications of your preference. They may be ignored. The belief that
you can deal with multiple copies of email merely by setting a header
and expecting client software to take automatic action is false.
Reply-To: is by far your best hope in doing so but it doesn't guarantee
things either. You'll note that although I follow your reply-to preference
I've also Cc'd d-d and set reply-to myself.
Anand
--
I close my eyes, only for a moment and the moment's gone
All my dreams, pass before my eyes a curiosity
Dust in the wind, All we are is dust in the wind
Don't hang on, nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky
Dust in the Wind -- Kansas, Don Kirshner
Reply to: