> > Personally, I like this arrangement as well. With this list, I also
> > think the default should be to have the list name in the From: header. I
> > think most folks forward their message to the list, like I'm doing now,
> > rather that replying to the sender. For example, this is how things are
> > on the mailing list for the OSU web server. The name of the sender is
> > always available from other headers.
> The From: header doesn't make that much of a difference for me. But if
> you were to ask me then I'd strongly recommend for putting a "Reply to:"
> header in the mail. The "Reply to:" header should obviously point to
> the comp-fort... (jiscmail) address. Otherwise one needs to manually
> remove one address (like I had to remove Phillip's address just now); as
> the mail sent to the list will reach him, obviously! And I don't
> believe in sending the same thing to somebody twice. I guess that
> including a "Reply to:" header shouldn't be too difficult to
> incorporate. It facilitates both the sender and the recipient.
Most (all?) email software will reply to the Reply-To: header
preferentially, if it exists, overriding the From: header. If the From:
header is visible, this would show the identity of the sender, though
this should be obvious from the message itself, if the sender deems it
important. (Some email software might construct a new From: header from
the Reply-To: header, but the effect is the same. The main thing is
that it is clear to the user whom he is sending (how many) messages to,
but this is mainly a problem of the user's email software and only to a
lesser extent that of the format of the list.)
--
Phillip Helbig Email .............. [log in to unmask]
Kapteyn Instituut Email ................. [log in to unmask]
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Tel. ................... +31 50 363 6647
Postbus 800 Fax .................... +31 50 363 6100
NL-9700 AV Groningen Web ... http://www.astro.rug.nl/~helbig/
My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer.
|