On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:07:00PM -0400, Richard Pieri wrote: > Derek Martin wrote: > > That should be fine unless the author has already done that. > > RFC 2822 is clear on what does not belong...
This response is particularly thoughtless. I'm well aware of what the RFC says. I'm also well aware that there are plenty of times when RFCs conflict with other RFCs, don't consider all of the possible cases, or just plain get it wrong. If that were not the case then no RFC would ever be updated, ever. If a mailing list--which is already a special case of e-mail usage--*ADDS* a reply-to header to an e-mail which matches the from header of the message, when none previously existed, the net effect is nil: respondants will (assuming they even honor reply-to, which is not a guarantee) reply to the same address they would if there were no reply-to. It may not strictly conform to the RFC but it is not problematic. Standards are important, and good, *when the definition of the standard is good and sufficient*. Regardless, blind adherence to standards (or anything) is folly. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
