On Mar 10, 2011, at 12:45 PM, objectwerks inc wrote: >> > Sure it is. The RFC shows INFORMATIONAL headers which are there to tell the > human user how to post to the list. If an email client wants to make use of > them that is up to the client but there is nothing in the RFC that says that > an email client HAS to do anything with List-Post.
I never said it was required. I said it should honor it, because otherwise, if we follow the RFCs cited, and there is no honoring at all of List-Id, every conforming single list + email client would necessitate the use of Reply All, or manually inserting the list email address in the To field. List serves aren't supposed to use Reply-To: so that munging is not a work around *if* we conform to RFC. I did say, and continue to say, that the default behavior of whether replies go to the post author or the list is not list owner domain. They can only set List-Post to No, and make the list non-posting. Naturally this too SHOULD be honored by email clients, otherwise how else would the default behavior automatically be established to prevent undesired emails from going to a non-posting list? People do not look at List-Post to know if they should or should not reply to a list. It should be automatic. It's a very straight forward, entirely code able logic that does not at all require human intervention to get the proper results. > Your email client does what YOU tell it to do, and nothing more. And you > are telling it to do the wrong thing when you REPLY ALL and don't trim down > the resultant shotgun blast of addresses. In your opinion. Your request that I manually trim is denied. Chris Murphy_______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
