No In-Reply-To and no References Header when Answering

[Guest]

Outlook 2003 does not write a In-Reply-To or an References Header when
Replying to a mail, which makes it impossible to participate any mailinglist.
Is there a configuration option or a bugfix available?

 

[Diane Poremsky [MVP]]

It really makes it impossible to participate in a mailing list? I don't have
a problem... what problems are you experiencing?

There is not a bug fix and I'm not expecting one... Outlook uses a thread
index, in place of references and in reply to.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Author, Google and Other Search Engines (Visual QuickStart Guide)



Join OneNote Tips mailing list: http://www.onenote-tips.net/

 

[Guest]

It really makes it impossible to participate in a mailing list? I don't have
a problem... what problems are you experiencing?

The problem is that I (as well as other Outlook users) are messing up the
thread-view on most of the mailing lists. Most (All?) other mail-programs are
using the References or In-Reply-To header to find out to what this mail
refers to. If Outlook deletes these headers on an reply, your post openes a
new discussion thread instead of beeing displayed as answer. On high traffic
mailing list these torn threads are pretty hard to read. Which
(a) has the effect that the Outlook-Answer will not be read (because it is
at a totally different position on the list: New thread "RE: My Subject").
And because of that
(b) causes bad blood on other list-participiants. The sooner or later ask
you to change your mail-program or leave the list - A position that is quite
understandable.

There is not a bug fix and I'm not expecting one... Outlook uses a thread
index, in place of references and in reply to.

Which is wrong in my opinion. If Outlook starts a thread, it MIGHT be right
to use Thread and Thread-Index. But deleting header-information ON REPLY is
wrong.
From the view of a third party there is no way to find out that a Message
with a "Thread" header (and no "Reference") is the reply to a message with an
Reference header (and no "Thread"). Even Outlook Express 6 sets a correct
"Reference" Header. Why not Outlook?
And even Outlook can't reconstruct the thread-structure. Outlook just strips
everything before the first ":" in the subject line. Which causes Problems on
different Languages (Re:, RE:, Aw and also with Subjects like Note:,
Info:, OT: - this one is also a confirmed bug in the Knowledge Base.
So I expect Outlook to set a valid Reference Header (like Outlook Express
does). At least I want to configure whether Outlook uses "Thread" or
"Reference".

Seb

 

[Diane Poremsky [MVP]]

I'm very active in mailing lists and no one complains about threading and
only about 1/4 of the members use Outlook, if that.

Outlook won't strip prefixes if they are surrounded by brackets, are longer
than 4 letters, or contain non-alpha characters. OE will strip out to 5 if I
recall correctly.



--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Author, Google and Other Search Engines (Visual QuickStart Guide)



Join OneNote Tips mailing list: http://www.onenote-tips.net/

 

[Seb Koerner]

I'm very active in mailing lists and no one complains
about threading and

only about 1/4 of the members use Outlook, if that.

Which not necessarily means that the issue does not
exist. I for example never had a problem with Buffer
Overflows on SQL Server - but they existes and were fixed.

There are examples where the thread view is broken due to
Outlook posts. I just grabbed this one from Google.
Here
http://www.hu.freebsd.org/hu/arch/1999/Mar/
you can see that "Pelhrimovszky, Zsolt" broke the thread
each time he replied. The "AW" (both letters uppercase)
is the default-reply prefix for german outlook.

Also the In-Reply-To problem is reportet from other
people, not only me:
http://www.hypernews.org/HyperNews/get/hypernews/email/116
/1.html

I Admit that using the "Thread" Header is also possible,
http://forums.gfi.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?
ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000020
but the vast majority of Mail-Clients and Mail-Archivers
use "Reference". And if Outlook receives a mail with
a "Reference" header it is safe to assume that the thread
will break when replacing "Reference" by "Thread".

Seb

Outlook won't strip prefixes if they are surrounded by brackets, are longer
than 4 letters, or contain non-alpha characters. OE will strip out to 5 if I
recall correctly.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Author, Google and Other Search Engines (Visual QuickStart Guide)


Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com
Join OneNote Tips mailing list: http://www.onenote- tips.net/

The problem is that I (as well as other Outlook users) are messing up the
thread-view on most of the mailing lists. Most (All?) other mail-programs
are
using the References or In-Reply-To header to find out to what this mail
refers to. If Outlook deletes these headers on an reply, your post openes
a
new discussion thread instead of beeing displayed as answer. On high
traffic
mailing list these torn threads are pretty hard to read. Which
(a) has the effect that the Outlook-Answer will not be read (because it is
at a totally different position on the list: New thread "RE: My Subject").
And because of that
(b) causes bad blood on other list-participiants. The sooner or later ask
you to change your mail-program or leave the list - A position that is
quite
understandable.

Which is wrong in my opinion. If Outlook starts a thread, it MIGHT be
right
to use Thread and Thread-Index. But deleting header- information ON REPLY
is
wrong.
From the view of a third party there is no way to find out that a Message
with a "Thread" header (and no "Reference") is the reply to a message with
an
Reference header (and no "Thread"). Even Outlook Express 6 sets a correct
"Reference" Header. Why not Outlook?
And even Outlook can't reconstruct the thread- structure. Outlook just
strips
everything before the first ":" in the subject line. Which causes Problems
on
different Languages (Re:, RE:, Aw and also with Subjects like Note:,
Info:, OT: - this one is also a confirmed bug in the Knowledge Base.
So I expect Outlook to set a valid Reference Header (like Outlook Express
does). At least I want to configure whether Outlook uses "Thread" or
"Reference".

Seb

.