From: Peter Sylvester <Peter.Sylvester@EdelWeb.fr>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 19:40:33 +0200
Message-Id: <199709171740.TAA05387@emeriau.gctech.edelweb.fr>
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Issues from the past few weeks

> But the correct target list depends on the intentions of BOTH people.
> 
> There are two extremely common cases for the recipient:
> 
>    (1) ``I want to send a message to everybody.''
>    (2) ``I want to send a message back to the author.''
> 
> Now, you might naively think that #1 should use From + To + Cc, and that
> #2 should use From. However, there are several cases where the original
> sender wants to specify different targets:
There is also the case:  I want to send a message to the list of
addresses suggested by the originator, so the content of reply-to. 
> 
>    (1a) ``This address is a mailing list. I'm a subscriber. Please don't
> 	send me an extra copy.''
So he sets reply-to: list

> 
>    (1b) ``Bob doesn't want to see further discussion.''
Who is Bob, if he is one of the list-members, what can you do? If he was
explicitely in the cc:+to, the you  don't include him in a reply-to.
and add in the text:  
     ``Bob doesn't want to see further discussion.'' , please don't reply
     to him.

> 
>    (2a) ``This address doesn't receive messages. Use another address.''
Which address? YOUR address? Set From: new-address Sender: your address 

> 
>    (2b) ``Bob should get a copy of the messages sent to me.''
set From: me, Bob  Sender: me
> 
>    (2c) ``Bob's responsible for this---don't talk to me about it.''
set From: Bob   Sender: me

In ALL cases, you are always free to tell IN THE TEXT why you have put
something unusual or usual in the headers.

> 
> The simplest way to accommodate all of these cases is to have one field
> specifying targets for #1 and one field specifying targets for #2.
Adding another field opens the possibility that users or implementors
start thinking about all kinds of meaning for all possible combinations
of old and new fields. 

Managing an additional field is not a simple way for a user. You might
consider that the UA can help, for example to conserve and repeat received
'reply-all' headers, so your thread continues ... until you fall to one
old-style UA that silently drops these things. 

Peter Sylvester -- EdelWeb France

PS: I seem to understand some of your comments about required fields as :

'Nothing in the header should be mandatory in the format, if the originator
of a message is interested in a certain service, it is recommended
to put certains fields into the header'. For example:

A From: header allows the originator to indicate to the recipient who was the
originator of the message, if there is no From: there is simply no indication,
et basta. The receiver decides whatever he wants to do with such a message.
(and the UA might start crying 'attention spam warning')