From: Erland Sommarskog (sommar@algonet.se)
Date: Mon Oct 02 2000 - 02:10:26 CDT
"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <Shmuel@acm.org> writes:
> In <20000929222915.11727.qmail@kairos.algonet.se>, on 09/29/2000
> at 10:29 PM, sommar@algonet.se (Erland Sommarskog) said:
>
> >Only trivialists will look in the header for such information.
>
> Ad hominem alert! Instead of calling those who disagree with you
> trivialists, why note explain your reasons for not wanting it in the
> headers? You admit that you want him to know that it is a copy, you
> have no control over whether he sees the mail copy before or after the
> news copy, and the headers seem to be the obvious place to put the
> indication.
The header is the obvious place if you want to smack him in the head
later on when he complains that you didn't tell him that it was a copy
of a news article.
The right place if I want a user to see this information is in the body.
> Now, maybe there is no value to having an agent automatically flag
> copies, but you haven't made any such case. So far I haven't seen any
> valid arguments against having such a header, although there are
> issues as to whether this is the appropriate forum.
Problem is that that would be a mail agent, which is not covered by
this standard. For a Posted-and-Mailed header to be meaningful, it
would have to be part of the mail standard.
-- Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, sommar@algonet.se