Hello DG, I don't wish to nitpick - I'm new on the list, and have only been lurking until today. But I did just want to make a couple of points...
Wednesday, February 26, 2003, 11:10:35 PM, you wrote: DRS> The header pane does not reflect actual information. Just sent DRS> and received and it may be deceiving based on the MUA used. That's true, the headers reflect the time on the MUA, not the time on your PC. Either clock could be wrong or right. The recipient can make an educated guess at which is more correct, but will rarely have any proof. DRS> I do this because I have quite a bit of business correspondence DRS> daily and I want to insure, REGARDLESS of transport (MTA) and DRS> display time, that once I affix my PGP signature, utilizing the DRS> new or reply templates that I have here, that there is NO doubt DRS> on the receiver end at what time I created the reply. So ... Created. Not sent. A very important difference, for some people. When I received this message, it said that it was sent at 23:10. That's perfectly correct. Yet your procedure adds the time at time of creation. From that, I can surmise that it took you eight minutes to create the reply. (Not necessarily an accurate time, especially as either machine - your MUA or PC - could be out by a minute or more, for all I know.) More importantly, though, The Bat! correctly shifted the first MUA timestamp to MY timezone when it displayed it in the message list. That's why I said 23:10 - I had to shift your in-message datestamp into my timezone manually in order to get the time taken when calculating the above. A trivial operation, but I could only do this because I'm aware of the fact you're in a different timezone after having looked at the headers to see what the time on your first MUA was. That's why I rely upon the MUA timestamps, as do many people - because good mail clients will adjust the times to suit the reader's timezone. I therefore have two suggestions: Firstly, consider stating your timezone after the time in your new message/reply templates. That will help prevent any confusion on your recipient's side. Secondly, at least one person obviously prefers to read the message, then worry about times. I doubt there would be a complaint if this information appeared in your sig, like this: Message created on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 at 6:02:17 PM EST The information will still be there, just at a slightly different location - and far clearer for all your recipients, who will then be able to differentiate between time zones AND the date/time created and the date/time it was handled by the MUA, as per your intentions. All of this was intended in a helpful, constructive and friendly manner, naturally. Do with it as you wish. :-) -- Best regards, Philip mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62i on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
