HiJacking Threads Was: hostapd for Fedora 10

[Ed Greshko]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> Then I'm somewhat at a loss to understand what you mean by threading.
> The linking of replies to the messages being replied to joins the
> entire set together into a thread. The presentation of the thread as a
> visual hierarchy or whatever is a matter for the MUA.
>   
Take 4 messages, each written by a different person....

W - Original Message
X  - In-Reply-To W
Y  - In-Reply-To X
Z  -  In-Reply-To Y

If you rely solely on the "In-Reply-To" header there is no practical
method to link Z to W.  This would be especially true in the event where
either X or Y did not arrive or does not exist on the message store of
the local MUA.  Once has always to take into account these types of
circumstances.
>   
>> FWIW, I've found that RFC 2822 has a better discussion of the use of
>> "in-reply-to" and "references" headers and their intended usage.
>>     
>
> I quoted RFC822 because you said you weren't aware of RFCs which
> specify threading, and 822 is the original standard reference for
> email (at least in the form that's still in use).
>   
But...  RFC822 *does not* talk about threading.  You are implying that. 
And, even if that were the intent of the authors, it is not clear and
thus very much open to interpretation.
> 2822 is certainly more extensive, but I don't think it adds anything
> to the present discussion. For example, I'm not aware of any mail
> clients that use the References header, or that allow a message to be
> in reply to more than one originating message (such clients may of
> course exist, in which case it would be interesting to know about
> them). RFCs often specify stuff that most clients don't implement,
> e.g. not many people know that you can have a mail message with
> multiple From: headers (the canonical example is a message sent by a
> committee, each member of which appears in the From: line with their
> own address). I've never seen such a message and I doubt I could
> construct one with any of the clients I use, but the RFCs allow it.
>
>   
Thunderbird uses the "References" header.  If you were to reply to a
virgin message and examine the outgoing message you'd notice that it
adds the "In-Reply-To" and "References" headers which are identical.  If
you reply to a non-virgin message it adds the "In-Reply-To"  header with
the single message id of the non-virgin message and appends that to the
"References" header.

T-bird also uses the "Subject" line as a hint to threading to assist it
displaying threads when certain MUAs don't handle the "References"
header...as it strips it out on a reply.  As in violates the RFCs.

FWIW, not many people know that the "From" header in the message body
may be totally different from the "From" in the SMTP envelope and that
the "From" header isn't used for message transport or delivery.

-- 
fat electrons in the lines Mei-Mei.Greshko at greshko.com
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=cCSz_koUhSg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20090106/952347cd/attachment-0001.sig>