Sylvain Wallez wrote: > > Geoff Howard wrote: > > > Sylvain Wallez wrote: > > > >> Unico Hommes wrote: > > > <snip/> > > >>>> BTW, Unico, I don't know what is your mail software, but > it doesn't > >>>> send the "In-Reply-To" header, which breaks thread views > in Mozilla > >>>> and makes following discussions highly difficult. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I use Outlook. I checked the thread view in Thunderbird but it > >>> wasn't a problem there. What client are you using? I may > rise to the > >>> opportunity to finally exorcise The Evil Empire from > controlling my > >>> inbox ;-) > >> > >> > >> Read carefully: "...which breaks thread views in _Mozilla_..." ;-) > >> > >> Are other people experiencing this also? > > > > > > Yes, but I was very interested to hear they may have this solved in > > Thunderbird. I recently happened to look into what headers > were being > > sent by mozilla and outlook and did think it looked like > something a > > reader could solve... > > > Actually, Unico is not the only one. What I've found is that > Mozilla uses the In-Reply-To header whereas Outlook (at least > some version) uses "Thread-Topic" and "Thread-Index". > > Outlook's headers seem strange to me, as I don't know how a > mailer can rebuild a thread tree with just an indentifier for > the thread, but no information about the posts relationships. >
Outlook doesn't maintain post relationships. The 'thread view' in Outlook just consists of a long list of mails of the same thread, then sorted by date. It is less verbose but - at least if the thread is not too long - sufficient. Unico
