Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-54799-apmail-cocoon-dev-archive=cocoon.apache.org@cocoon.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 93177 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2004 18:06:22 -0000
Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Jan 2004 18:06:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 2119 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2004 18:06:04 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 2034 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2004 18:06:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@cocoon.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 1916 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2004 18:06:02 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO naomi.webworks.nl) (24.132.161.79)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Jan 2004 18:06:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: Mail thread headers (was Re: source resolving in 2.2)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 19:06:03 +0100
Message-ID: <84F0A43A4248CE45B5C0E20F4C40779C600B52@naomi.webworks.nl>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Mail thread headers (was Re: source resolving in 2.2)
Thread-Index: AcPnWPX+zylo3Kc/SHaeIwhYzQT9SgAAMSYA
From: "Unico Hommes" <Unico@hippo.nl>
To: <dev@cocoon.apache.org>
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

=20

Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>=20
> Geoff Howard wrote:
>=20
> > Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >
> >> Unico Hommes wrote:
> >
> <snip/>
>=20
> >>>> BTW, Unico, I don't know what is your mail software, but=20
> it doesn't=20
> >>>> send the "In-Reply-To" header, which breaks thread views=20
> in Mozilla=20
> >>>> and makes following discussions highly difficult.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I use Outlook. I checked the thread view in Thunderbird but it=20
> >>> wasn't a problem there. What client are you using? I may=20
> rise to the=20
> >>> opportunity to finally exorcise The Evil Empire from=20
> controlling my=20
> >>> inbox ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >> Read carefully: "...which breaks thread views in _Mozilla_..." ;-)
> >>
> >> Are other people experiencing this also?
> >
> >
> > Yes, but I was very interested to hear they may have this solved in=20
> > Thunderbird.  I recently happened to look into what headers=20
> were being=20
> > sent by mozilla and outlook and did think it looked like=20
> something a=20
> > reader could solve...
>=20
>=20
> Actually, Unico is not the only one. What I've found is that=20
> Mozilla uses the In-Reply-To header whereas Outlook (at least=20
> some version) uses "Thread-Topic" and "Thread-Index".
>=20
> Outlook's headers seem strange to me, as I don't know how a=20
> mailer can rebuild a thread tree with just an indentifier for=20
> the thread, but no information about the posts relationships.
>=20

Outlook doesn't maintain post relationships. The 'thread view' in
Outlook just consists of a long list of mails of the same thread, then
sorted by date. It is less verbose but - at least if the thread is not
too long - sufficient.

Unico