[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support

From: Robert Elz
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 03:23:26 +0700

    Date:        Wed, 04 Dec 2013 10:25:15 -0500
    From:        Ken Hornstein <address@hidden>
    Message-ID:  <address@hidden>

  | So _could_ you use it more?  Sure.  But I think in practice it's like
  | a few of the other oddball things in the RFC-822 syntax; little used,
  | and problematic in practice.

Absolutely - though (and given I don't personally generate the form that
exposes the addresses) no-one has reported any problems, and I do use it
quite a bit - including sending to fairly clueless users.   The empty
group-list form is the easy one for MUA's to deal with though, all they
need to do is ignore it.

But like many things, there's a chicken and egg problem - as long as nothing
seems able to deal with these, everyone will avoid using them.  As long as
everyone avoids using them, no-one bothers implementing sane handling for them.

And from the other message from you ...

  | This, and the other option you propose, end up being a little hard to deal
  | with in practice because it's all tied up in the address parser routines. 

I wasn't actually proposing anything - I was giving an example of the kind
of syntax that someone who actually wanted to propose this might want to 
adopt.   If I thought it would be easy to make this work, I'd probably do
it, but I don't, so...


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]