[tlug] Re: Quoting for Thread Breaking Digest Replies

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Jim writes:
 > Ken wrote:
 > 
 > >  On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:33:29 -0400, 
 > >  Jim <jep200404@example.com> wrote 
 > >  in <20070623133329.29eeca53.jep200404@example.com>:
 > 
 > Thanks. Your attribution is great! 
 > 
 > > > In my own replies to thread breaking digest replies, I wish I had 
 > > > restored the thread by adding the appropriate message IDs to the 
 > > > "References:" header line.
 > > 
 > > Unfortunately I am using an email client that is officially evil,
 > > and am not in a position to change it for a while still. If there
 > > is a "References:" line, it is not one I can get too.
 > 
 > Your email program is _not_ to blame in this situation.

Well, that depends on whether he's getting MIME digests or not.  If
he's getting MIME digests and has even a halfway MUA, it will explode
that into a folder containing ordinary messages, and the relevant
headers will be present in that case.  It's only RFC 934/1153 digests
that typically lose them.

Now, I went and did some forensics on Ken's message.  Ken, this is not
your fault, but Donald Knuth on a bicycle, what is this!!!?!?  信じら
れファキンない！

 > Thread-Topic: Quoting for Thread Breaking Digest Replies . . . . . . . . . .
	(Re:	[tlug] Re: font encoding question)
 > Thread-Index: Ace2FFf4v9udiyPsRsmcXtwmQ/KYYwAD2gDg

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms875184.aspx

It's an interesting idea (except that I don't see how it can be
properly implemented without user intervention of a kind I would not
expect a Microsoft product to permit), but *not* in the absence of
both References and In-Reply-To.

 > I'm not aware of any email program that makes that easy. 
 > _Manually_ adding messages IDs to the "References:" lines is hard,

In an Emacs-based MUA it is easy but tedious, ie, eminently
automatable.  However, it's generally preferable, as Jim says, to use
the In-Reply-To header, so that you're not responsible for maintaining
the historical order of the references.  Of course, that's assuming
you have write access to either one.

 > > How was this for a proper reply, given my circumstances? ^_^
 > 
 > Great! Thanks! 

+1