Richard Kulawiec wrote: > > I don't think it's a religious war: I think it's long since been > demonstrated that RFC 2919 (and 2369) including List-Id are not only > good ideas, but best practices, and that subject-line tags should > be deprecated/avoided/discouraged, because they're just a kludge. > > That is, this is an issue of technical merit, not arbitrary whim. > So instead of bringing back the obsolete idea of subject-line tags, we > should instead be encouraging (a) all IETF lists *not* to use them,
-2 List-Id: can be used to automatically archive EMails for mailing list or other distributions which one reads only casually -- there it saves manual work. > but to > use List-Id et.al. instead (b) all (relevant) mail software providers to > support them and (c) all (relevant) mail server providers to support them. > These mechanisms neatly solve a number of problems, and that better > positions everyone to tackle those that remain. If one intends to actually *process* close to all of the Emails hitting one's inbox in near real time, then List-Id:, and any pre-sorting based on it, will _always_ slow down processing (unless the MUA or the processing is flawed). Whereas a subject prefix significantly facilitates tracking of stuff in a single large inbox. I'm getting 300+/day Emails and try to read >95% of it (my company internal Email is completely seperate at ~30/day, though). -Martin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf