Re: List Header complaints
Re: List Header complaints
- Subject: Re: List Header complaints
- From: Chuq Von Rospach <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 09:23:41 -0800
At 10:00 PM -0400 11/1/00, John MacDonald wrote:
a) This link isn't clickable (missing 'http://':
List-Id: Help and discussions for scripters developing scripts and
solutions in AppleScript. <applescript-users.lists.apple.com>
List-ID isn't intended to be clickable. It's there to identify the
list uniquely for scripting and filtering purposes. That's the
correct format for it, and you can look up the RFC if you want to
find out more about it.
b) *IF* a list of links is required with every post, it should be
placed at the bottom of the message (as mentioned by others).
Not possible, because they are mail headers, and headers can't be
placed in the body of the message.
The RFC for the list-* headers is RFC 2369. the purpose of those
headers is to allow people who run mail lists to embed information so
that mail clients can automate process for their end users -- whether
it's setting up an "unsubscribe" button or creating a URL for a user
to click to get list help. it's a new standard, but it solves a HUGE
problem for mail list systems, which is how to help users get access
to list-administration options, since we all know pretty much the
only people who DO keep those "welcome" messages are the people who
don't need them anyway.
Support for these headers in clients is still primitive at best, but
it's a new, important standard, and if the list servers don't support
it, there's no impetus for the mail client authors to do so, so MLMs
like Mailman have to (and are) taking the lead in making that
information available -- even on the internet, adoption of new
functionality takes time. The added overhead is trivial compared to
finally having a single, standard way of documenting these necessary
data pieces and doing so in a way that allows automated use of that
data for our non-techie/naive users.
The nice thing is, if you really, really want that, you have the
ability to do things on the client end to do it. This would be pretty
trivial to do with procmail, for instance. But I don't think we
should gut things on the server end to the lowest common denominator
("let's not do anything anyone doesn't like") because we might as
well shut down and go home.
these headers are a new, emerging email standard. I'd like to suggest
you get used to them, because I think over the next year or so,
they'll become very common as MLMs add the feature and sites upgrade
to the new software.
E-mail is a very dynamic area of the internet right now. It's scary
how much it's changed in the last two years (he says, as a person who
makes his living trying to keep up with it). This is just one piece
of it, but it's a huge one in the long term, because it allows us to
help build tools for those that don't know the techie details enough
to do these things for themselves - and that's a huge problem with
mail lists right now.
c) A list mechanism that won't support styled text (something that
would very useful to the list's members) shouldn't be cluttering up
the system with a lengthy header.
Except -- we WILL be supporting styled text, as soon as I can do it
safely. All the hooks are there, the mising piece is the anti-virus
coding.
My advice: Instead of the link header, provide a footer with a
single link to a web page that features the many links available and
possibly, if the list must cater to the email-only crowd, a 'mailto'
link that sends return mail with the current list of lists.
that's not posible and be in conformance with the new standards.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Apple Mail List Gnome
(
mailto:email@hidden) + (
mailto:email@hidden)