Re: Request: Anyone using bogus / "humorous" X-Message-Flag headers, could we please turn them off
| От | Michael Glaesemann |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Request: Anyone using bogus / "humorous" X-Message-Flag headers, could we please turn them off |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 74BAE5E0-E954-42B6-B5DF-23264770CA5E@seespotcode.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Request: Anyone using bogus / "humorous" X-Message-Flag headers, could we please turn them off ("Bill Bartlett" <bbartlett@softwareanalytics.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
On Oct 5, 2007, at 10:56 , Bill Bartlett wrote: >> * Given it's an X- header, doesn't that mean the meaning of >> the value >> is implementation dependent? What's "bogus" wrt Outlook may not be >> wrt another mail system or client >> * Doesn't this indicate that Outlook is broken (for some values of >> broken)? > > Actually, no -- this is why I listed a specific X- header ( > X-Message-Flag ) rather than simply saying "Hey, would everyone please > turn off their X-headers". This specific X- header is designed to > have > Outlook "flag" a message and display an extra line of text with the > flag > comment above the email. If it were a specific *Outlook* header, shouldn't it be namespaced? e.g., X-Outlook-Message-Flag? Might not other email clients operate differently when they encounter the X-Message-Flag? For example, in your message, I see an X-MSMail-Priority flag, which I assume is a Microsoft-specific X-header. (I may very well be interpreting this wrong: brief googling didn't turn up anything, and I'm not an email guru.) Anyway, that's all I have to say on the topic: I suggested alternatives, and as it's not a problem for me — and I don't believe my emails include X-Message-Flag headers so I'm not contributing to your problem — hope you find a solution that works for you. Michael Glaesemann grzm seespotcode net
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: