Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address
From: Dan Pop (Dan.Pop_at_cern.ch)
Date: 03/03/04
- Next message: Massimiliano Alberti: "Arithmetic and C"
- Previous message: Dan Pop: "Re: which is the better path"
- In reply to: Arthur J. O'Dwyer: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Next in thread: Mark Henning: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Reply: Mark Henning: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 3 Mar 2004 13:05:25 GMT
In <Pine.LNX.4.58-035.0403021557190.7933@unix48.andrew.cmu.edu> "Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <ajo@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Dan Pop wrote:
>>
>> Martin Dickopp <expires-2004-04-30@zero-based.org> writes:
>> >Dan.Pop@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
>> >> Martin Dickopp <expires-2004-03-31@zero-based.org> writes:
>> >>>Darklight <nglen702@netscape.net> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Mail-Copies-To: nglen702@netscape.net
>> >>>
>> >>>Don't set Mail-Copies-To to an invalid email address, please!
>> >>
>> >> Which RFC defines this header?
>> >
>> >AFAIKT it's a non-standard, but widely implemented header.
>>
>> I.e. it's a bug in the software implementing it.
>
> No, it's a feature. (How do you draw half a smiley?)
>
>> If it didn't make its way into an RFC, there must be a reason.
>
> AFAIK, sliced bread doesn't have its own RFC, either.
If it were relevant in any way to Usenet, you may have had a point...
>I hardly think that is a valid argument.
RFC 1036 is to the Usenet what the C standard is to C programming.
By your logic, HTML posts and MIME attachments should be fine, too.
>> Even the Followup-to header is a mistake, IMHO. The poster has no
>> business controlling the options of the people who decide to reply.
>>
>> He may kindly suggest followups to a subset of the Newsgroups header or
>> even by private email, but not enforce it.
>
> Duh. What do you think the "Followup-To" header is used for?
>It's a standardized way of suggesting where "Followups" should go
>"To." It would be impolite to force your readers to cut-and-paste
>a list of followup groups from the message body, wouldn't it?
> Usenet is a text medium, and text never "enforces" anything unless
>the reader's news client wants it to.
2.2.3. Followup-To
This line has the same format as "Newsgroups". If present, follow-
up messages are to be posted to the newsgroup or newsgroups listed
here. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's imperative to the client software, not a mere suggestion. And it's
not uncommon for clients to behave accordingly.
Dan
-- Dan Pop DESY Zeuthen, RZ group Email: Dan.Pop@ifh.de
- Next message: Massimiliano Alberti: "Arithmetic and C"
- Previous message: Dan Pop: "Re: which is the better path"
- In reply to: Arthur J. O'Dwyer: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Next in thread: Mark Henning: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Reply: Mark Henning: "Re: [OT] Mail-Copies-To header set to invalid address"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
