From: Henry Spencer (henry@spsystems.net)
Date: Thu Apr 16 1998 - 10:56:02 CDT
> > Like "Re: " and all the headers, "(was: " is a keyword, not content...
>
> No, people are proposing that it be MADE a key word, currently it's just
> content, I agree with Maurizio that it shouldn't be standardized as that
> doesn't provide any real benefit - you can't count on what comes after
> it to be the complete previous subject).
However, you can usually count on it being at least *part* of a previous
subject, which may be useful in deciding whether to display it. Having
a standard convention strikes me as useful. As with conventions in the
message body, it isn't absolutely reliable, but if there is reasonably
consistent adherence to it, it can be useful to user interfaces even if
violations do occur.
Henry Spencer
henry@spsystems.net
(henry@zoo.toronto.edu)