Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Oct 19, 2010, at 13:50 , Charles Marcus wrote:

On 2010-10-18 6:27 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Even if the Reply=To were modified, wouldn't the inclusion of the OP on
the messages fall apart as soon as somebody didn't use Reply All?

The purpose of Reply-To header is to manage how replies are handled.
Reply All is not necessary if the Reply-To header is correct and you use
a standards compliant mail client that doesn't ignore it.

Unfortunately, Charles, about 99.3% of the general public, or, say, 87.2% of the people on this 
list don't have such a mail client.  At the moment I'm using Mac Mail, which pulls the sender's 
name if I press Reply, and everybody's name if I press Reply All.  As far as I remember Outlook has 
the same characteristics.  I can't remember what T-Bird did on Linux and I haven't used pine in a 
hundred years.

I think this is probably because Reply To is not set in most clients, and is filled in on sending 
from the Sender field.


E-mail to for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.