Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p04301401b4c44160d936@resnick2.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20000207030920.P8561@lorax.whoville.leftbank.com>
References: <p0430140cb4c4186175d1@resnick2.qualcomm.com>
 <200001281141.GAA05529@ietf.org>
 <20000206181626.K8561@lorax.whoville.leftbank.com>
 <p04301406b4c3fb2d9955@resnick2.qualcomm.com>
 <20000207013707.A22353@thyrsus.com> <200001281141.GAA05529@ietf.org>
 <20000206181626.K8561@lorax.whoville.leftbank.com>
 <p04301406b4c3fb2d9955@resnick2.qualcomm.com>
 <200001281141.GAA05529@ietf.org>
 <20000206181626.K8561@lorax.whoville.leftbank.com>
 <20000207030920.P8561@lorax.whoville.leftbank.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 03:44:31 -0600
To: Ofer Inbar <cos@ne.cohesive.com>
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: References header language
Cc: drums@cs.utk.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2/7/00 at 3:09 AM -0500, Ofer Inbar wrote:

>  > The "References:" field will contain the contents of the parent's
>  > "References:" field (if any) followed by the contents of the parent's
>  > "Message-ID:" field (if any). If the parent message does not contain a
>  > "References:" field but does have an "In-Reply-To:" field containing a
>  > single message identifier, then the "References:" field will contain
>  > the contents of the parent's "In-Reply-To:" field followed by the
>  > contents of the parent's "Message-ID:" field (if any). If the parent
>  > has none of the "References:", "In-Reply-To:", or "Message-ID:"
>  > fields, then the new message will have no "References:" field.
>  >
>  > Note: Some implementations parse the "References:" field to display
>  > the "thread of the discussion". These implementations assume that each
>  > new message is a reply to a single parent and hence that they can walk
>  > backwards through the "References:" field to find the parent of each
>>  message listed there. Therefore, trying to form a "References:" field
>  > for a reply that has multiple parents is discouraged.             
>
>But saying something is discouraged implies that it is allowed. 
>And, as Eric is pointing out, if it is allowed, but isn't being 
>defined, that needs to be explicit.

I am perfectly willing to add the phrase "and how to do so is not 
defined in this document" to the end of the last sentence if that 
anwers your objections.

>But that's only half the problem.  The other half is, as far as I can
>tell, we've said *nothing* at all Message 4's References: header.

Yes we have. Assuming Message 3 has no References field, Message 4's 
References field will contain Message 3's message-id. See the first 
sentence. Perhaps I need to change the third sentence to read:

If the parent has no "References:" field, no "Message-ID:" field, and 
no "In-Reply-To:" field with a single message identifier, then the 
new message will have no "References:" field.

>If you'd like, I'd be happy to write a complete replacement for 
>these two paragraphs.

We are way past the stage for rewriting large chunks here. I still 
believe that minor tweaks can make this crystal clear for the odd 
case of someone who wants to read something weird into this stuff and 
that there is no need for any major change.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick@qualcomm.com>
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102