Re: [Evolution] Message priority - a recap

[Lonnie Borntreger <email borntreger com>]

On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 16:16, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> Danw and I agreed that if we were to implement this, we'd probably use
> the Importance: header as X- anything headers could have anything in them
> (plus they are non-standard, hence the X- prefix). We'd probably also do
> whatever needed to be done in order to be compatible with Outlook I
> guess.

To be compatible with Outlook, you'll need to use X- header of some
kind, using X-Priority would have a side affect of being compatible with
several other popular clients.... but as I stated, that is your call.

Hummmmm.  Just rechecked and I have to correct myself. Outlook2k DOES
send "Importance:" (using the RFC text values no less). That is the only
other mailer I tested that uses that header.  The only other header that
is common across most mailers is X-Priority.

So, just doing Importance WILL make you compatible with Outlook2k (I did
not test Outlook98, but could fire up VMware and test it if you would
like.

Maybe a feature request for Mozilla/Netscape(6,7) and Kmail to use
Importance: is in order???

I'll have one of my friends that uses AOL send me a high priority
message so I can see the headers for that, if you are interested.

> > > On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 13:43, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > [ snipped a lot of RFC stuff ]
> >
> > Damn.  I spent two hours last night looking through RFCs and didn't see
> > any of this.  What RFC search engine do you use?
>
> I just use google :-)

I went through 12 pages of search results from google, and then moved to
an RFC specific search engine, and still didn't find what you did. :( Of
course I searched for the Importance: field just now and found a page
that shows all headers with RFC pointers on my first page of search
results.  Go figure....  It's bookmarked now. :)

> I think the int and string values are probably an attempt at being
> compatable with 2 of the 3 types of mailers that use this header.
> Unfortunately, I would think that any mailer that parsed headers in the
> way specified by rfc822 would NOT correctly handle the string value
> within the comment section (comments are comments, not values).

I DID manage to find 822.  And it did strike me rather strangely that
Netscape/Mozilla add the text inside of () which are comments according
to 822.  Maybe they just meant it to be a comment describing what the
number relates to so that others know that they mean 1 to be highest
priority.  I guess only those developers know the reason.  I don't
remember if Outlook adds a (string)... let me check... Outlook2k also
uses the (string) on X-Priority, but Outlook Express does not.


-- 
TTFN,
Lonnie Borntreger