[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: HiJacking Threads Was: hostapd for Fedora 10



Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Ed Greshko <Ed Greshko greshko com> wrote:
>   
>>
>> Hummm....  Can't say that I recall an RFC that fully/adequately covers
>> threading.  Can you cite the RFC?
>>     
>
> RFC 822:
>
>      4.6.2.  IN-REPLY-TO
>
>              The contents of this field identify  previous  correspon-
>         dence  which this message answers.  Note that if message iden-
>         tifiers are used in this  field,  they  must  use  the  msg-id
>         specification format.
>
> Although the text doesn't explicitly use the term "threading", it's
> pretty clear what is meant.
>   
Hummm.....  It leaves quite a bit open to interpretation and it would
only link one message with one reply.   I was looking for something more
all encompassing.   But never mind....
>
>> Not to mention that most of the headers
>> that email clients do use to help in threading aren't normally accessible.
>>     
>
> Not sure what you mean here. They're accessible to the MUA if not
> directly to the user. In any case, I'm arguing for *not* messing with
> them, so the point is moot.
>   
Right....    Not sure myself what my purpose was. 

I suppose it was to point out that the average user doesn't have access
to the headers they would have to change in order to *not* break
threading by doing what they are doing. 

Then again, if the average user knows that what they are doing is going
to break threading they wouldn't do it ... and if they did they wouldn't
know what headers to fix ... and if they did it would be hard to the
point of not doing it in the first place.

Bottom line....  You're right and that(those) paragraph(s) shouldn't
have been written.   :-)
>> Besides, I could never figure out how hitting reply, changing the
>> subject, and changing the body, to create the illusion of a "new*
>> message is easier than just actually writing a new message.
>>     
>
> Yes, it's one of life's little mysteries. In many clients composing a
> new message is even easier than replying. Just click on the address
> field in an existing message and voilĂ .
>
> poc
>
>   


-- 
What's the MATTER Sid?... Is your BEVERAGE unsatisfactory?
Mei-Mei Greshko greshko com http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=cCSz_koUhSg

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]