[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: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@s...>
• Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:16:14 -0500

Joe English <jenglish@f...> wrote:

> 
> Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> > Uche Ogbuji writes:
> > >The question of whether or not to munge reply-to is a guaranteed 
> > >flame-war starter, but I just wanted to put in my 2c that XML-DEV 
> > >does this rightly, regardless of other technical issues.
> >
> > And I agree with Uche on this point, adding that I wish more people 
> > would trim the recipients list when they reply.
> 
> 
> +1.
> 
> Also, if posters would reply To: the list (as Simon just did) 
> instead of To: the sender and Cc: the list (as Uche just 
> did), then "Reply to list" will have a better chance of 
> working in most MUAs.
> 

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...

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

• Prev by Date: Re: Reply-to munging
• Next by Date: Re: Reply-to munging
• Previous by thread: RE: ANN: White Paper - "Using OWL to Avoid Syntacti cRig or Mortis"
• Next by thread: Re: Reply-to munging
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread