On 10.06.06 14:07:49, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Andreas Pakulat <apaku@gmx.de> wrote:
> >On 09.06.06 07:53:14, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> >> --On Friday, June 09, 2006 3:37 PM +0200 Urs Thuermann
> ><urs@isnogud.escape.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The threads in this mailing list are shown badly cluttered in my mail
> >> >reader (worse than mosts mailing lists I am subscribed to). I think
> >> >this is caused by the following:
> >>
> >> Threading in mailing lists is implemented using the Message-ID header and
> >> References header. The References header refers to the Message-ID headers of
> >> prior messages. IMAP servers use this to tell clients about threads. The
> >> Subject line is only used (by some clients) as a workaround to systems that
> >> break the References chain.
> >
> >The In-Reply-To Header is also needed for proper threading. Without it
> >you'd have all messaged belonging to a thread withing the same tree, but
> >not in the right order, because the messages without In-Reply-To are put
> >under the OP.
>
> Not if the References: header is used correctly... (In-Reply-To is
> actually less reliable than References, because many readers don't
> conform to the suggested format.)
I didn't read any RFC's on this, but from my experience References
contains the message Id's of _all_ earlier messages in the (sub)thread.
In-Reply-To in turn contains the message Id of the "parent" message (the
one that was replied to). Now if In-Reply-To is missing, you cannot
figure out which message is an answer to which other, thus mail clients
just append to the OP mail.
Or does the References header have a particular order?
Andreas
--
You need more time; and you probably always will.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 10 14:45:22 2006