[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Reply-to munging

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Reply-to munging
• From: Jeffrey Lomas <jeff.lomas@o...>
• Date: 22 Apr 2003 12:23:38 -0400
• In-reply-to: <E196d4u-0000y2-00@b...>
• References: <E196d4u-0000y2-00@b...>

Something else to consider:  If the reply-to is munged to point back to
the list, it is more likely that OOTO messages and other auto-responders
will end up in the list archives rather than going only to the poster.  

Let us say:
1. There is an average of 1000 posts to the list per month.  
2. There is an average of 10 subscribers that have some sort of
auto-responder set at any one time.
3. There is an average of 1700 subscribers to xml-dev.

Assuming my math is accurate, it is quite possible that there could be
an additional 10,000 meaningless messages in the archive and an
additional 1.7 million messages sent out from the mail server.

Jeff

On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 17:07, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> 
> > I have no problem with the "munging" of the "reply to". That is indeed how I
> > expect a mailing list to work.  What I've been seeing is that I've got to do
> > a "reply to all" to get things to the list instead of a simple "reply".  If
> > Simon's postings had been directly to the list, I believe a simple reply
> > would have worked, but instead I keep finding myself needing to do a
> > reply-to all to get things back to the list. (for example, to get a reply to
> > the list for this e-mail.)  Something's different WRT to xml-dev then the
> > other lists I work with...
> 
> >From my reading of Simon's and Joe's messages, the three of us know that's 
> what you mean.  And we disagree with you that it's a bad thing to have to use 
> reply-to-all.  From what you say it seems that the other lists you frequent 
> use reply-to munging.  I think that's nasty, and I gather many others agree 
> with me.  To be fair, there are prople who swear by it, and that's why I said 
> it's such a flammable topic.
> 
> Simon and Joe also make a separate admonishment to me to trim headers, which I 
> too often fail to do in EXMH.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Uche Ogbuji                                    Fourthought, Inc.
> http://uche.ogbuji.net    http://4Suite.org    http://fourthought.com
> Gems From the [Python/XML] Archives - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/04/09/py-xml.html
> Introducing N-Triples - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think17/index.html
> Use internal references in XML vocabularies - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-tipvocab.html
> EXSLT by example - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-exslt.html
> The worry about program wizards - http://www.adtmag.com/article.asp?id=7238
> Use rdf:about and rdf:ID effectively in RDF/XML - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-tiprdfai.html
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
> 
> 

• References:
  • Re: Reply-to munging
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Syntax vs semantics
• Next by Date: [off-topic] A minute of silence for Edgar F. Codd (1923-2003) --> creator of the relational database model
• Previous by thread: Re: Reply-to munging
• Next by thread: RE: Reply-to munging
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread