From: Seth Breidbart (sethb@panix.com)
Date: Sun Mar 14 2004 - 10:53:35 CST
"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <Shmuel+gen@patriot.net> wrote:
> In <200403132028.i2DKS7Q06442@panix5.panix.com>, on 03/13/2004
> at 03:28 PM, Seth Breidbart <sethb@panix.com> said:
>
>>The _meaning_ (in terms of what is permitted, SHOULD, MUST, etc.) is
>>the same.
>
> No, it is *NOT* the same,
"SHOULD do X, but MAY do Y." versus "SHOULD do either Y or X."
Please tell me exactly what behavior is permitted by one but not the
other, at any level (MUST, SHOULD, MAY). If there is no such
behavior, then the meanings are equal at that level.
>>I don't want wording that suggests adding "Re: " when not present is
>>anti-preferred.
>
> While others don't want wording that suggests that adding "Re: " is
> reasonable, much less preferred.
People who read Usenet find it useful. Any suggestions that UAs
should _add_ it for display when it isn't present but a References:
header is will be laughed at. (Besides, that changes current
behavior: when somebody changes the topic, but continues in the same
thread, they change the Subject header. It's easy to see the first
such change because it doesn't have the "Re: ".)
Seth