On 04/08/2014 10:40 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
The original specification and use of reply-to was simple and effective. If we still had that world, your suggestion would work well. However the overloading of reply-to that took place over the years has produced MUAs that process the field erratically and often not very well.
The same is also true - albeit to a lesser extent - for the contents of the From: header when messages are posted to mailing lists. Thunderbird in particular (but it's not the only one) has semantics around replying to list traffic that I doubt the developers can keep straight in their heads, let alone anyone else. It is probable that this complexity arises in part from the use by list managers of pointing Reply-To at the list.
I wonder how frequently people actually need to be able to reply-to-author to a message to a mailing list. Perhaps breaking this isn't actually all that serious either.
- Roland -- Roland Turner | Director, Labs TrustSphere Pte Ltd | 3 Phillip Street #13-03, Singapore 048693 Mobile: +65 96700022 | Skype: roland.turner [email protected] | http://www.trustsphere.com/ _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
