[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Please! Fix your MUA! (was: Re: question regarding prelinking)

On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 10:01:51PM +0100, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> Can. You. *Please*. Finally. Make. Your. MUA. Put. In-Reply-To: and/or
> References: In. Your. Posts? 
> I /don't/ care that Outlook doesn't consider them necessary and thinks
> it can use Thread-Index or some such moronic newfanglednese instead.
> They are. So I don't care /how/ you do it, and I care even less that you
> may have to switch to a different MUA if that is what it takes to make
> your posts standards compliant.

I've seen many posts by Outlook users using correct threading headers
(though broken in any number of other ways).  I don't know if it
differs between versions.

There's no User-Agent header on his posts, though, so there's no telling
what mailer he's using--extremely bad form on the part of whoever wrote
that mailer, since it's impossible for people to report bugs on other
peoples' mailers without it.

> (I'm not the first to ask either, I think).

I should point out that in this case (in response to some other posts on
this subject), the post not only doesn't have thread headers, it has a
different subject, so even mailers that fallback on subject threading
have no way of handling this.  (And falling back on subject threading is
only mildly less annoying than having the message completely detached
from the thread it's replying to, as this one is.)

Perhaps I should just plonk messages that have "^Re:" in the subject
line and no In-Reply-To or References ...

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: