DZ-Jay wrote:
> On Sep 04, 2010, at 11:40, Arno Garrels wrote:
>> Hello DZ-Jay,
>> At least Firebird provides 5 priorities so why should we remove this
>> feature from ICS?
> It's not standard, most clients assume there's only "low," "normal,"
> and "urgent".  In any case, setting TSmtpCli to use only three values
> (which is what it currently does, by the way) 

It actually uses 5 values, look at the source:

        if FHdrPriority <> smtpPriorityNone then begin
            FHdrLines.Add('X-Priority: ' + IntToStr(Ord(FHdrPriority)));
            if FHdrPriority < smtpPriorityNormal then begin
                FHdrLines.Add('Priority: urgent');
                FHdrLines.Add('X-MSMail-Priority: High');
            else if FHdrPriority = smtpPriorityNormal then begin
                FHdrLines.Add('Priority: Normal');
                FHdrLines.Add('X-MSMail-Priority: Normal');
            else begin
                FHdrLines.Add('Priority: non-urgent');
                FHdrLines.Add('X-MSMail-Priority: Low');

>> It's likely that X-MSMail-Priority can be removed, however my OE v6
>> still uses it, XP SP3.
> But that's OE v6.  The question is, do we want ICS to impersonate OE
> v6, or to implement the protocol and let the client extend it as it
> wishes? 
No, I do not think so.

> I don't have Windows at hand right now, could you test if OE v6
> handles "X-Priority" or "Priority" too?  

It understands "X-Priority" not "Priority". 

> Remember, one thing is the
> header it sends, another is the headers it understands from incoming
> mail.  Typically, mail client developers understand that they receive
> messages from many different clients.

I understand that since along time.
> I think ICS should do the same, pick one from the most common ones
> and send that one only.  

Most likely, but it has to be tested with all common e-mail readers
in use today. I currently haven't the time to do that.

> Client applications using TPop3Cli component
> should then take care to expect different formats and attempt to
> decode them.  It should not hurt to include more than one, but it may
> be unnecessary, and it also doesn't follow the convention of other
> popular clients.     
> The RFC standard suggests "Priority," but like I said, not many
> clients seem to be using it.  They probably support it, though.  The
> most common one seems to be "X-Priority".

That's my guess as well, but before we change the source it must be 

Arno Garrels

To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto
Visit our website at

Reply via email to