On Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2014 21:44:58 CEST, Karan Luthra wrote:
I am not sure whether picking up a new way of conveying this (compressed) information is good for inter-operability. While these suggestions are well thought, and serve the purpose well, they are still not part of any standard or convention (sorry, are they? I would have more confidence in implementing them even if they were a not-yet-adapted or in-process standard).
I'm not aware on any standard on this, eg. german outlook will send you stuff like: WG: AW: Foo bar (Weitergeleitet - Forwarded; Antwort - Reply) rather than Fwd: Re: Foo bar There's also [Fwd: AW: Foo bar] See this (ancient) thread: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=61827 There's no actual field for forwarding (unlike in-reply-to and resent-*) - technically it's just a new message. I'd hope that other MUAs would jump on "Fwd:" and in doubt consider the trailing number first part of the message (ie. when condensing "Fwd:" prefixes to one, leave the header intact) In "worst" case, you'll require "Fwd: " and I expect stuff like "Fwd(2): " to fail in such other MUAs parsers. Cheers, Thomas
