Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!xanth!ames!pacbell!dsinc!syd
From: syd@DSI.COM (Syd Weinstein)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: Suggestion
Keywords: Re: in the subject line.
Message-ID: <1989Oct13.021727.21190@DSI.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 89 02:17:27 GMT
References: <1989Oct12.150441.11245@wash08.uucp>
Reply-To: syd@DSI.COM
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc.  Huntingdon Valley, PA
Lines: 28

rae98@wash08.uucp (Robert A. Earl) writes:

>Our homegrown mail software (user agent) numbers multiple replies on
>the same subject...ie:
>Dummy Subject
>Re: Dummy Subject
>Re(2): Dummy Subject
>Re(3): Dummy Subject
>Any chance of elm being able to do this?  Is it a good idea?
Oh, no, its the nn war all over again.  If we mix the netnews
and mail traditions, this is a nono.  Although RFC822 has nothing
to say on the matter, for subject follow up threads, this
will break many systems out there.  Like it was a bad idea
in news, I thinks its a bad idea in mail.

It has another problem, also, If a message is sent to more
than one person, there could be different Re(2):'s and Re(3):'s
as each of them reply.

Lastly, I wonder if the ()'s before the : break the syntax
within RFC822, I know () surround comments after the :, but I don't
know if they have any meaning before the :'s, or even if anybody
thought about it.
-- 
=====================================================================
Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP                   Elm Coordinator
Datacomp Systems, Inc.				Voice: (215) 947-9900
syd@DSI.COM or {bpa,vu-vlsi}!dsinc!syd	        FAX:   (215) 938-0235