Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(May 2001)
 

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

Subject: Re: test message,or reply's to, which worse?
From: J C Lawrence <claw @ kanga . nu>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:06:33 -0700
To: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Cc: "David W. Tamkin" <dattier @ ripco . com>, list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Message from Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> of "Mon, 28 May 2001 10:08:11 PDT." <200105281700.f4SH0Fh01295@plaidworks.com>
References: <200105281700.f4SH0Fh01295@plaidworks.com>

On Mon, 28 May 2001 10:08:11 -0700 
Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> wrote:

> which goes back to previous discussions here that reply needs to
> be tri-state: reply to author, reply to list, and reply to
> all. Unfortunately, there's no way to implement that, and the
> whole reply-to coercion 'thing' is simply an attempt to use
> reply-to to implement a bogus form of reply to list...

A number of Unix MTAs such as mutt and exmh have support a tri-state
reply function by adding a List-Reply capability when RFC 2369
headers are found.  (Under exmh here it even adds a new GUI button
and menu with all the 2369 controls for post, subscrube, unsubscribe
etc)

When AOL et al will catch up is another question, especially given
their market driven focus on reduced complexity.

-- 
J C Lawrence                                       claw@kanga.nu
---------(*)                          http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/
The pressure to survive and rhetoric may make strange bedfellows



References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: test messages etc
From: Roger Burton West <roger@firedrake.org>
Next: Re: test message,or reply's to, which worse?
From: "David W. Tamkin" <dattier@ripco.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: test message,or reply's to, which worse?
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: test message,or reply's to, which worse?
From: "David W. Tamkin" <dattier@ripco.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com