Hi all,
Matthew Miller wrote:

>On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 07:49:42PM -0400, John Hansen wrote:
>
>>I'm one of the people who does this.  Up until your message, I didn't=20
>>realize that this caused a problem.  I guess I was under the impression=
=20
>>that threads were defined by the subject and if the subject changed, it=
=20
>>would be interpretted as a new thread.  If this is not the case, what=20
>>field is keyed on to determine whether something is a thread or not?
>>
>
>It is the In-Reply-To field. For this message the field is:
>In-Reply-To: <427FF716.1020907@fredonia.edu>
>
>The value of this field is supposed to be a globally unique id generated=
 by
>your mail reader. If a mail reader groups messages only by subject then
>there is no way to tell who responded to whom (and thus can't display th=
e
>messages in a threaded view), the In-Reply-To field gets around this
>problem.
>
<nitpick>
It's not quite that easy, you have to take References headers into the=20
picture (and free form In-Reply-To from RFC 822).
For a full dissection of a good threading algorithm (there are some=20
small things to tune, like Swedish MS lookout using SV: instead of Re:=20
when answering by default) please read jwz's essay:
http://www.jwz.org/doc/threading.html
<\nitpick>

Make good things
/jp

--=20
 jens persson         #          Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the
 <jens@persson.cx>    #                                    semicolon.
 M=E4ster Olofsv=E4g 24   #                   -- Epigrams in Programming,
 S-224 66 LUND;SWEDEN #                        ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist