[time-nuts] HP5370 board needed

[William H. Fite]

This conversation is beginning to sound like the doctoral students and
post-docs in my lab one-upping each other on an afternoon when no one has
much else to do.





On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Mike S <mikes at flatsurface.com> wrote:

> At 04:03 PM 4/12/2011, Rex wrote...
>
>  Email message headers contain a thread-index number. Any decent email
>> program groups the messages into threads using this (normally hidden)
>> information.
>>
>
> The Thread-Index: header (and Thread-Topic:) is a completely proprietary,
> non-standard header created by Microsoft. From that, "decent email program"
> does not follow.
>
> The correct header to use is References:, as defined in RFC 1036 (and RFC
> 2822), and to a lesser extent, In-Reply-To:, which is a mess.
>
> But, since both References: and In-Reply-To: were very loosely defined when
> originally created in RFC 822, threading is, and always will be, unreliable.
>
> The OP apparently replied to an existing message and put a new subject in.
> His MUA put in fresh Thread-*: headers, and handled References: and
> Reply-To: properly. Your MUA used the updated References and/or Reply-To to
> place that message into an existing thread.
>
> None of that is unreasonable, none of it violates standards, yet it breaks
> threading, because support for threading was never properly specified to
> begin with. Pointing fingers at someone is misplacing blame, and pissing
> into the wind, too.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>