the only quasi-official reference i've been able to find on the Mail-Followup-To header is:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/I-D/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt while i think that this becoming standard would be a Good Thing, since the draft is from 1997, it would seem unlikely that it will be adopted as a standard, at least unless there's some sort of initiative. i wrote the pine developers this week, asking that they make pine at least honor this header, and was asked by mark crispin if there was a document describing this / listing it as a standard. the link above was the only document i could really send back, which - admittedly - lacks any sort of 'official' clout (having expired in may 1998). while i don't use pine, it is annoying when pine users don't honor my mail-followup-to headers. while it's easy to sit and say that mutt does things 'right', and all other MUAs do things wrong, it seems that perhaps doing things to try and get this type of thing standardized would increase the liklihood of other MUAs becoming less brain damaged. while mutt users (myself included) may see mutt's way of doing things as 'correct', without an rfc on the subject (and adoption by more MUAs), it's hard to tell other poeple that they're doing things wrong. while we all (presumably) love mutt, it's hard to say that it's the MUA for everyone.... so a push towards getting this type of thing adopted as standard would be very helpful. does anyone else have information on what it would take to set the proverbial wheel turning on getting this adopted as some sort of official standard? -- William Yardley System Administrator, Newdream Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/gpg.asc
