Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) 
        by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id NAA12883; Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:49:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.7); Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:47:33 -0400
Received:  
        by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id NAA12764; Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:47:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (cu.nih.gov [128.231.160.112]) 
        by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id NAA12734; Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:47:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199710251747.NAA12734@CS.UTK.EDU>
To: esr@snark.thyrsus.com
cc: drums@cs.utk.edu
From: "Roger Fajman" <RAF@CU.NIH.GOV>
Date:     Sat, 25 Oct 1997  13:42:36 EDT
Subject:  Re:  MUA practice summary meets Billy The Kid

> A = Default configuration always overrides From with Reply-To.
>
> B = Default configuration's "group reply" command (whatever assembles
>     From+To+Cc when Reply-To is absent) still uses To or Cc when Reply-To
>     is present.
>
> C = Default configuration ignores Reply-To if given a non-default choice at
>     send time.
>
> D = Reply-To rules can be globally reconfigured by user.
>
> E = Has `standard' two-button or two-command UI ("personal" and
>     "group").  Exceptions are explained by a note.

I think it would also be useful to record which UAs allow their
users to easily insert a Reply-to header in outgoing messages.
Microsoft Exchnage does not allow it at all.  Simeon has a fill
in the blank field for it (although you have to scroll down to
see it).  I would not count or would note separately a UA that
simply allows manual editing of the message headers to insert
a Reply-to with no other assistance from the UA.