Re: [Evolution] Bounce/remail command

[Christian Borup <borup borup com>]

Michael Wood wrote:

> Hi
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 08:38:28PM +0200, Christian Borup wrote:
> > u07ih abdn ac uk wrote:
> [snip]
> > > Only the private account can print emails, so if there's an
> > > interesting mail on the list I can bounce it to the other
> > > account and print it without having > in front of
> > > everything.
> >
> > But a forwarded message doesn't have to be mangled, in fact it
> > should just be forwarded as is in a message/rfc822 mimepart
> > (with headers and everything).  This way the original message
> > can be read, printed or even replied to.  Just because many
> > mail clients forward stuff wrongly, doesn't mean we need to
> > keep dooing so.
>
> Ahhh, but one thing I really hate is the way Outlook does NOT
> quote replies and forwards with '> '.

Repiles and forwards are not the same and should not be treated as if they
were.

> When someone replies to me using Outlook, I have to wade through
> the whole thing trying to remember what I wrote and then figure
> out which is theirs.  Outlook's option to put [Replier's Name]
> infront of what they write, might make things slightly easier,
> but I find the '> ' quoting MUCH cleaner and more readable.

No argument there, but only when talking replies.

[snip]

> If you want the e-mail to be complete and not have someone
> comment on it, maybe attaching it as a message/rfc822 is OK, but
> normally people reply to the things and then it's nice to be
> able to distinguish what you said from their comments.

This is why one should not confuse replies with forwards.
Replies should allways be quoted (with ">" or whatever).
I wouldn't mind an option to forward quoted, but I don't think it should
be default (that should be message/rfc822).
Forwarding inline as Outlook does is just plain evil, and should never be
done (it should not be done for replies either).

./borup