[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2003/09/12]
> Typical example. Someone sends out a list to a whole bunch of people
> saying "Drinks at my place, mail me if you're coming". Why can't they set
> some headers that mean that if someone hits reply on thier mail client
> then it automatically replies to them and just them?
address = mailbox ; one addressee
/ group ; named list
group = phrase ":" [#mailbox] ";"
mailbox = addr-spec ; simple address
/ phrase route-addr ; name & addr-spec
phrase = 1*word ; Sequence of words
word = atom / quoted-string
So what you're supposed to do is:
From: My Name <my.name@xx.xxxxxx.xxxxxxx>
To: "My Name's Drinks List" :;
Then if you want to let people know what's in the list, you can add it
in a user-defined header or in the body of the message, say at the end...
Distribution: hates-software mailing list
sleepy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
sneezy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
dopey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
grumpy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
happy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
bashful@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
hungry@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
> What would be nice is that I can reply to the original sender and set the
> default reply to send to everyone in the group. I mean, the other members
> of the group don't need to know she's forgotten the date - they only need
> to see the reply with the correction.
Reply-to: "My Name's Drinks List" : name name name ;
> But no, our software is dumb.
Probably so, I mean this has only been in the standard for 20 years.
If programmers blithely ignore user interface design rules that are 20
or more years old, why the hell do you think standards will fare any better?
Software sucks, that's why we're here.
Generated at 14:02 on 01 Jul 2004 by mariachi 0.52