On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 15:58:35 -0600 Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Nov 14, 2013, at 15:09, Pablo Rodríguez <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think it might be worth to discuss the point you make. > > In fact I should have pointed you to this newer article: > > http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html > > which explains why the discussion ended in 2001: > > > > In April of 2001, the IETF issued af new document, RFC 2822, which > > obsoletes RFC 822. In this new RFC, the author addresses the > > Reply-To header field in a few places, but the most relevant to > > this discussion is the following in section 3.6.2 "Originator > > fields": > > > >> When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the > >> mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests that > >> replies be sent. > > > > Your list software is not "the author of the message", so it must > > not set or in any way meddle with the Reply-To header field. That > > field exists for the author and the author alone. If your list > > munges it, you are violating the standard. The list server is the *distributor* of the message. A message intended for persual by, and a possible response from, any of the current subscribers to a list. Any mail client software worth it's salt, should recognise the origin of a list-server distributed message, and correctly deduce the address to which a response should be sent, namely that of the list-server itself. As a matter of protocol and netiquette, any personal responses to a list distributed message, should contain the words OFF LIST: pre-pended to the content of the Subject field Regards, Chris. --------------- SWFTools-common is a self-managed list. To subscribe/unsubscribe, or amend an existing subscription, please kindly point your favourite web browser at:<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/swftools-common>
