>That was actually about lack of a References header, and I agree, that >there should be one (and we have one now, so that's a non-issue).
You had asked if anyone actually uses the References header for threading, and it turns out the answer here is "yes!". >Some of the issue here, is that there's no concept of a "thread" in the >e-mail standards, and everyone defines it slightly differently. Yeah, I mean ... I think that came over from Usenet, right? I remember the trn mail reader had a nice ASCII display that showed the message tree. I admit that for me, a message "thread" sounds kind of linear, where a "tree" is probably closer to the reality. I guess it's a set of messages which are all replies to one another. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
