From: Frank Ellermann (nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de)
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 18:22:57 CDT
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> the original message would also have caused a problem.
See my reply to Eivind, the original article was a genuine
control cancel message with Subject: cmsg cancel <whatever>
There's no problem with "Subject: cmsg" in real control
messages. It should be okay to post non-control followups
to any "Subject: cmsg foo". At the moment that's not the
case, followup agents should do "something" like adding a
"Re: ", or removing the "cmsg ", or encoding the "cmsg ".
> >What about old mail agents
> They're not news agents.
We want compatibility with RfC 2822. Therefore interesting
cases behind a mail2news gateway are also relevant for news
or at least for gateways.
>> How do you identify threads in this case,
> You don't; articles in different threads can[1] have the
> same Subject.
Me and my newsreader disagree, we define thread in the same
way for news and mail, and that includes the Subject: when
necessary.
> [1] And, all too often, do.
Yes, Google also disagrees with you, and sometimes displays
the same Subject: as one thread, even if the Date: differs
by several years. Of course Google's definition is broken.
Bye, Frank