Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id NAA18859; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:00:08 -0500 (EST) Received: by cs.cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 20 Feb 1999 12:59:26 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA18788; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 12:59:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from resnick1.qualcomm.com (resnick1.qualcomm.com [206.139.85.98]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA18771; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 12:59:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from resnick2.qualcomm.com (206.139.85.99) by resnick1.qualcomm.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:57:57 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com Message-Id: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 4.1b71-3.99] Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:57:53 -0600 To: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) From: Pete Resnick Subject: Re: References and In-Reply-To (section 3.6.4) Cc: drums@cs.utk.edu, lc-drums-msg-fmt@apps.ietf.org List-Unsubscribe: My apologies for the resend to DRUMS, but the address for lc-drums-msg-fmt was incorrect in the original message. Please only reply to this one. On 2/20/99 at 2:31 PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote: > For the mail recipient, this means how to show the user a map of related  > messages, and how to allow him to navigate that map. > > Thanks to news usage, it is very well understood (even though an appalling  > number of MUAs just ignore this feature) how to do this in case of single  > parents. Let me start by denying this assertion. Though I have seen countless examples of how to do this when there is a simple thread, I believe once a thread has multiple branches most of these navigation utilities are as incomprehensible to the average user as multiple parent presentation would be. At least I know that they're incomprehensible to me once you get around 5 branches coming off of 5 replies to a single message. But that said: > As far as I can make out, *nobody* has an answer of how to do it in case  > of multiple parents, at least without hopelessly confusing most users. > > Unless someone can come up with *any* scheme of how to do it that can be  > understood by the average user, I *strongly* object to any notion of  > multiple parents as completely useless protocol bloat. (This does not mean  > that such a scheme should be part of the protocol, but it does mean that I  > require an existence proof of the possibility of such a scheme.) OK, an existence proof, though I would not at all be in favor of putting this into the protocol at this time: Protocol: When you have multiple parents, the References field of the child is formed by appending the References and Message-ID of each parent in the order that each parent's Message-ID appears in the In-Reply-To field. Now you can walk the References field and find out the references chain for each parent. (Yes, there are problems with this if one of the parents is in the chain of another parent, but we can make some arbitrary syntactic moves to help with that. But this is just a back-of-envelope exposition.) Presentation: Those of us who write graphical MUAs can use the same kind of viewing engine that we've got in the class-hierarchy browsers in our development environments: boxes representing each message, lines representing the thread "inheritance". Click on a box, open the message. Perhaps we can display a portion of the hierarchy in the message window or in a separate floating palette showing where you are in the tree. My claim is that: (a) It's perfectly "doable"; (b) The ability to indicate multiple parents is in 822 now since it allows multiple msg-ids in the In-Reply-To field; and (c) It corresponds to reality in that people do replies to multiple messages all of the time and it's absurd to deny those semantics and remove something that's in the current standard just because we don't have the tools to display those semantics at the moment. I would (I think equally) strongly object to the removal of multiple parents from the 822 syntax, and therefore want us to explain the semantics of them in some way in 822bis. I think some combination of the text that Jamie and I have suggested on the DRUMS list is a reasonable way to go. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (619)651-4478, Fax: (619)651-1102