Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id OAA05485; Tue, 15 Aug 1995 14:34:40 -0400
X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Tue, 15 Aug 1995 14:34:39 EDT
Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id OAA05475; Tue, 15 Aug 1995 14:34:34 -0400
Received: from localhost by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK)
          id OAA21462; Tue, 15 Aug 1995 14:34:32 -0400
Message-Id: <199508151834.OAA21462@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/
From: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>
To: Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
cc: ietf-drums <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>, moore@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: Does "References:" form threads? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 15 Aug 1995 18:18:05 +0200."
             <Pine.SUN.3.91.950815181306.7288F-100000@ester> 
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 14:34:26 -0400
Sender: moore@CS.UTK.EDU

> > Jacob,
> >   I'm not clear about the relevance of e-mail's
> > use for scientific paper dissemination, and I believe that, in some
> > disciplines it's actually significantly used.   I'd therefore appreciate
> > your expanding on this a bit if you would, please.
> 
> I was only discussing a technical issue: Should a future revised
> version of RFC822 recommend that client software for e-mail should
> regard two messages, which are related to each other with
> a "references" link, belong to the same thread.

It would be best if we did it this way.  If we do so, we can build
threaded mail readers.  Otherwise, References isn't terribly useful.

For our RFC, this might take the form of a description of how to
manipulate References (along with In-Reply-To) when building replies.

Keith