Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(December 1993)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: A question of philosophy
From: "F. Scott Ophof" <Ophof @ CS . UWindsor . Ca>
Organization: Coming RSN...
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 05:29:27 -0400
To: List-Managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 06 Dec 93 19:28:29 +0000

On Mon, 06 Dec 93 19:28:29 +0000 Alan Thew said:
>On Mon, 6 Dec 1993 19:05:45 +0000 (GMT)  John Martin wrote:
...
>>2. If a Reply-To field exists in the incoming message then one is not
>>added.
>This is the same as BITNET LISTSERV and is my personal preference.

It is the default setting for a large number of mailing lists, with
the post-to-list address in the Reply-To if the poster didn't
include a Reply-To.
But there are enough lists which force the Reply-To to show either
the posters addr, or the post-to-list address.

Whoever said that Reply-To thus can have two different meanings sure
hit the nail on the head.  So yet another reason to cast about for a
better, more consistent setup.  Like, someone somewhere suggested
List-Reply[-To] for replies to the list reply address, and Reply-To
for the poster's address.

And although not relevant to mailing lists, a News-Reply[-To] would
make for consistency for people using their MUA as newsreader (which
is one of the newer trends, it seems).


Regards.
$$/    [Member of RexxLA]
---
   REXX:  A user's dream in a system programmer's world...

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: A question of philosophy
From: Keith Moore <moore @ cs . utk . edu>
Next: Re: Comparison of Unix-based listserver software?
From: riddle @ is . rice . edu (Prentiss Riddle)
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: A question of philosophy
From: chip @ chinacat . unicom . com (Chip Rosenthal)
Next: mailing to a GEnie site
From: david @ snowhite . cis . uoguelph . ca (David C. J. Leip)

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com