From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Tue May 04 2004 - 23:39:06 CDT
Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In <20040504083050.GB20607@tagseth-trd.consultit.no> Eivind Tagseth <eivindt@multinet.no> writes:
>
>
>>The semantics of the Subject-header for a followup-article are the same as for
>>a normal article.
>>[
>> I'm worried that Charles' current wording may be misinterpreted to mean
>> that copying and prepending with "Re: " is the only valid subjects, and
>> thus not let the user manually change it to whatever is desired.
>> I can't see how someone will actually think this, but there seems to
>> be a lot of thoughtlessness in todays newsreaders. If noone agrees,
>> remove it, or move it to USEAGE.
>>]
>
>
> No, my wording is quite clear that once the followup agent has created (or
> "suggested") the default, the user can override it in any way he pleases.
However it does not permit a followup agent to prompt the user to "supply
an appropriate subject field text", it does not allow for (e.g.) vi as a
followup agent, it does not allow for a followup agent that uses AI or
similar technology to suggest an appropriate subject, etc. In short it
encroaches upon user-interface issues that we have no business encroaching
upon.
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################