Re: Intent to revive "expires" header from draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-15

[Michael Welzl <michael.welzl@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 11:20 +0100, Paul Smith wrote:
> Chris Haynes wrote:
> > 2) Can the semantics of an 'expired' message be agreed and communicated in a clean, simplistic, non-technical way?
> >   
> I'm not sure they can be expressed in any way at all... All I can figure 
> out so far is that the expiry of a message implies it's possibly not 
> quite as important, urgent or valid to the 
> sender/recipient/some-other-person as it would have been before it expired.
> 
> I'm not sure that's a tight enough definition :)

I think that this is as good as it gets. In a previous email, I wrote:

> "it becomes less important after that date because it is somehow
> bound to it".

which has the same meaning. We automatically agree on this meaning
because it's obvious, so defining it cleanly shouldn't be too difficult.

Cheers,
Michael