From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Reiner Steib Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Differences between mail-mode and message-mode Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:46:46 +0200 Message-ID: <8763dktv1l.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> References: <878wimdbzp.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87tz1av8ik.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <83vdlqp0rt.fsf@gnu.org> <874ot8zyqb.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <877hy1gog9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Reiner Steib NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1248288440 22722 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2009 18:47:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:47:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 22 20:47:12 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MTgqO-0000FL-2P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:47:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40336 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MTgqN-0004nF-Jp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:47:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MTgqH-0004lY-Sz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:47:05 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MTgqC-0004ew-Kq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:47:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46769 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MTgqC-0004ej-4W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:47:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.uni-ulm.de ([134.60.1.11]:47806) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MTgq8-0003Lq-BT; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:46:56 -0400 Original-Received: from bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de (bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de [134.60.10.175]) by mail.uni-ulm.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n6MIkouA007095; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:46:50 +0200 (MEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bridgekeeper.physik.uni-ulm.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08417138FC; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:46:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Face: /U7=m^"/-Dn61mAl{g9e3>\G5Tp,oEX|V)g2I1hBk\ML; )7A?6cmB-y7y?'NA^J<=oz7syB =(McAwIHgLX!.B?R3X}98d@?>CrT094KLWh]WU4gDpnL/")MS(XoQTv`Oq225uL>+; CpPXo$N5e>N> $tPd-gbB^F{gQS#1ase]XO~D4p4M"3+F-7~u]dy3I?Pb8RO*H-EFeWDUf?Rf, d]pv\Jvh2Cht!A=im yKAS2Z%Ao^;}W/qzMvMm Mail-Followup-To: turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull), Eli Zaretskii , ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <877hy1gog9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:35:18 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-DCC-dcc1-Metrics: triton 1182; Body=4 Fuz1=4 Fuz2=4 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:113018 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:68804 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 22 2009, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Reiner Steib writes: > > > Obviously the key bindings cannot be resolved without a change for > > either mail-mode or message-mode users. Maybe set the bindings > > depending on some compatibility variable? > > How about the presence of Newsgroups? > > > . In mail-mode C-c C-f C-f moves to FCC; in message-mode C-c C-f C-f > > > moves to Followup-To, and C-c C-f C-w moves to FCC. > > Followup-To is rarely useful in a mail message. A message-mode buffer can be news, mail or both. E.g. when adding Cc to a news posting, the buffer also becomes a mail buffer (see `message-news-p' and `message-mail-p'). I think modifying key bindings depending on `message-news-p'/`message-mail-p' would be confusing. > > > . In mail-mode C-c C-f C-a moves to Mail-Reply-To; in message-mode > There is no Mail-Reply-To header in the mail standards AFAIK. > > > . In mail-mode C-c C-f C-l moves to Mail-Followup-To; in message-mode > > > C-c C-f C-m moves to Mail-Followup-To and C-c C-f C-l is undefined > There is no Mail-Followup-To header in the mail standards AFAIK, > although there is a plausible argument that it is useful for mailing > lists. AFAIK, both aren't in any RFC. But at least Mail-Followup-To is quite useful (and also supported by other MUA like mutt). Bye, Reiner. -- ,,, (o o) ---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- | PGP key available | http://rsteib.home.pages.de/