On 1/4/2006 15:43, Nico R. wrote: > Hmmm, I've never been sure about how to do this correctly. I tried > Googling, but no convincing solution to the problem turned up.
All IMHO: Neither 1a or 1b make sense unless the original message was the one which led to the subject change. Even if the subject is different, it still came about due to a point somewhere in the thread and it should follow that natural progression of the conversation. Regardless if there is an "Re: ", one should not include it in the $oldSubject. The Re: is not part of the subject at hand. It is just there, I suppose, as a visual reminder for people that don't have a proper threading MUA, or have deleted the previous messages. In addition, I would also suppose that the best behavior would be to drop the whole "(Was: ...)" part in any subsequent replies since the subject has already been changed and new replies are Re: the new subject. If the subject is still close enough to the original one that both should remain then I would question whether the subject should really have been changed in the first place. Looking about at the general state of most people's netiquette around the net I would say tough going to get people to abide by any of these complexities. I say that as I observe the various LFS lists seem to be much better behaved than most places of discussion. Maybe some day they will teach the proper use of email in grade school and it will be better. Most people now seem to treat it like a slow IM instead of a fast memorandum. ~Jason -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
