On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, at 1:56pm, Bob Bell wrote: > IMHO, "Mail-Followup-To" is a cleaner solution. Oh, I agree that a header specifically for this reason is a much better solution. However, until such time as Mail-Followup-To becomes an effective solution, I plan on including a "Reply-To" header as well.
Hmmm... wait a second... doesn't... [quick web search]... yah. http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html Mail-Followup-To is designed to be used in conjunction with Mail-Reply-To. As DJB says, "RFC 822 did not recognize reply-to-author and follow-up as separate features." These two new headers do. Thus, one should include all three. Reply-To is set to the list address, Mail-Followup-To is set to the list address, and Mail-Reply-To is set to the author address. Legacy software which does not recognize the newer headers sends to the list by default, as is normal; newer software sees the Mail-Reply-To header and knows that it overrides Reply-To. Personally, I would have called the headers "Reply-To-All" and "Reply-To-Author", just to make that distinction completely bloody obvious, but since I didn't write the spec, I don't have a say. :) -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
