Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!isaak!woerz
From: woerz%isaak@isaak.uucp (Dieter Woerz)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Tired of bogus subject lines?
Summary: Why not use the In-Reply-To: line of MUAs
Keywords: In-Reply-To: Reference
Message-ID: <1533@isaak.UUCP>
Date: 18 Sep 89 15:52:44 GMT
References: <2454@auspex.auspex.com> <13666@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@isaak.UUCP
Reply-To: woerz%isaak@isaak.UUCP (Dieter Woerz)
Organization: ISA GmbH, Stuttgart, West-Germany
Lines: 23

In article <13666@well.UUCP> Jef Poskanzer <pokey@well.sf.ca.us> writes:
> ...
>I suggest that one reasonable way to have reference-following handle
>gatewayed groups is to ignore them.  Let it break on 3% of the articles.

You could even reduce the number of articles without reference-line
in gatewayed groups, when the gatewaying software tries to use the
In-Reply-To header line, which I think most UAs generate, in mailed
postings. You should have mailed the posting with the original
Message-Id line (the one used by news) and then you get the message-
id of the article to which the mailer has replied. If it is needed
you could even try to look up the referenced article and include the
references from this one into the article to be added.

>Who cares, it would still work loads better than subject-following.
>Or, you could fall back on subject-following when the references line is
>missing.
> ...

Dieter Woerz
ISA GmbH, Azenbergstr. 35 D-7000 Stuttgart-1 W-Germany
UUCP:           {pyramid!iaoobel,uunet!unido}!isaak!woerz
BITNET/EARN:    woerz@ds0iff5