[Mailman-Users] RFC for List Message Header Fields

[Dave Sill]

Darren Henderson <darren at jasper.somtel.com> wrote:
>
>Email is not the web the web is not email. I don't like bluring the
>distinction.

That's an interesting POV for a Mailman user.

>It assumes a lot about about users and the state of the world. It may
>lead people to think that embeding html in email is a good thing.

Embedding html might well be a bad idea, but it's inevitable. Whatever 
minor encouragement the List-* headers provide will be insignificant
in the grand scheme of things.

>While a lot of people use netscape etc to do mail a lot of people don't.
>Yes, the latest versions of pine have the capability of dealing with urls
>but the older ones don't and a lot of sites aren't upgrading.

URL's, especially mailto URL's, are human-readable. If you're going to 
put an e-mail address in a new header, why not do it as a URL so a few 
more users will be able click them and avoid copying errors and tedium?

>Most people see their mail with a limited number of headers, these won't
>be visible to them.

This is a new standard. A few years down the road, if it catches on,
these headers won't be hidden--or, if they are--the MUA will have an
"Unsubscribe from list" button that will Do The Right Thing.

>Yes they can look at the other headers but most don't
>know too. Eventually mua's could be altered to display those paticular
>headers by default as it stands currently I don't think any of them do.

So you argue against them because MUA's don't support them? Catch 22.

-Dave