I rather like the "Re[n]: " feature, but on another list
an issue of compliance arose. Thoughts? (Note the issue
is compliance with the "spirit" of RFC 2822, and I'm not
quite sure what to make of that.)
Cheers,
Alan
------ Forwarded message ------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:01:09 +0200
Subject: Opera-users digest, Vol 1 #892 - 30 msgs
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFC2822 says that the four-character string "Re: " MAY be added at the
start of the subject to indicate a reply. As far as adding extra ones
is concerned it warns against the possible unpleasant side effects but
doesn't explicitly forbid them, unfortunately:
The "Subject:" field is the most
common and contains a short string identifying the topic of the
message. When used in a reply, the field body MAY start with the
string "Re: " (from the Latin "res", in the matter of) followed by
the contents of the "Subject:" field body of the original message.
If this is done, only one instance of the literal string "Re: " ought
to be used since use of other strings or more than one instance can
lead to undesirable consequences.
The spirit -- if not the letter -- of RFC2822 appears to be that you
add "Re: " or nothing. "Aw: " and "Re(n): " are right out, no matter
how cool the "look what we thought up" authors believe they are.
-------- End of message -------
-------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by:
ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/
_______________________________________________
Mahogany-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-users
