On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 16:16, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > Danw and I agreed that if we were to implement this, we'd probably use > the Importance: header as X- anything headers could have anything in them > (plus they are non-standard, hence the X- prefix). We'd probably also do > whatever needed to be done in order to be compatible with Outlook I > guess.
To be compatible with Outlook, you'll need to use X- header of some kind, using X-Priority would have a side affect of being compatible with several other popular clients.... but as I stated, that is your call. Hummmmm. Just rechecked and I have to correct myself. Outlook2k DOES send "Importance:" (using the RFC text values no less). That is the only other mailer I tested that uses that header. The only other header that is common across most mailers is X-Priority. So, just doing Importance WILL make you compatible with Outlook2k (I did not test Outlook98, but could fire up VMware and test it if you would like. Maybe a feature request for Mozilla/Netscape(6,7) and Kmail to use Importance: is in order??? I'll have one of my friends that uses AOL send me a high priority message so I can see the headers for that, if you are interested. > > > On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 13:43, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > [ snipped a lot of RFC stuff ] > > > > Damn. I spent two hours last night looking through RFCs and didn't see > > any of this. What RFC search engine do you use? > > I just use google :-) I went through 12 pages of search results from google, and then moved to an RFC specific search engine, and still didn't find what you did. :( Of course I searched for the Importance: field just now and found a page that shows all headers with RFC pointers on my first page of search results. Go figure.... It's bookmarked now. :) > I think the int and string values are probably an attempt at being > compatable with 2 of the 3 types of mailers that use this header. > Unfortunately, I would think that any mailer that parsed headers in the > way specified by rfc822 would NOT correctly handle the string value > within the comment section (comments are comments, not values). I DID manage to find 822. And it did strike me rather strangely that Netscape/Mozilla add the text inside of () which are comments according to 822. Maybe they just meant it to be a comment describing what the number relates to so that others know that they mean 1 to be highest priority. I guess only those developers know the reason. I don't remember if Outlook adds a (string)... let me check... Outlook2k also uses the (string) on X-Priority, but Outlook Express does not. -- TTFN, Lonnie Borntreger _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
