Re: [hypermail] In-Reply-To field and Netscape

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_haxx.se_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:38:44 +0100 (MET)
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0103242033040.1556-100000_at_pm1.contactor.se>

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Roderick Bloem wrote:

> If I take a message from the archive, and click [ respond to this message
> ], that corresponds to the URL, say:
>
> "mailto:boldhsv_at_jobim.colorado.edu?Subject=Re:%20BUG%20FIXED:%20guided%20search%20for%20CTL&In-Reply-To=&lt;3ABB843B.C8D4D127_at_colorado.edu&gt;".

This mailto: link does not conform to what RFC2368 (section 2) says about mailto: URLs:

     mailtoURL  =  "mailto:" [ to ] [ headers ]
     to         =  #mailbox
     headers    =  "?" header *( "&" header )
     header     =  hname "=" hvalue
     hname      =  *urlc
     hvalue     =  *urlc

Note how multiple headers are separated. Then read a following paragraph from that same RFC:

   Because the "&" (ampersand) character is reserved in HTML, any mailto    URL which contains an ampersand must be spelled differently in HTML    than in other contexts. A mailto URL which appears in an HTML    document must use "&amp;" instead of "&".

> Note that there is no In-Reply-To field!

... this might be because of this bad format. But also:

   The user agent interpreting a mailto URL SHOULD choose not to create    a message if any of the headers are considered dangerous; it may also    choose to create a message with only a subset of the headers given in    the URL. Only the Subject, Keywords, and Body headers are believed    to be both safe and useful.

There's nothing that says it must use that header, even if it understands it.

-- 
      Daniel Stenberg - http://daniel.haxx.se - +46-705-44 31 77
   ech`echo xiun|tr nu oc|sed 'sx\([sx]\)\([xoi]\)xo un\2\1 is xg'`ol

Received on Sat 24 Mar 2001 09:45:03 PM GMT