From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Leo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6675: 23.2; field, header and headers Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:32:13 +0100 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279609261 3972 80.91.229.12 (20 Jul 2010 07:01:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:01:01 +0000 (UTC) To: 6675@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 20 09:01:00 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6p1-0005GA-MY for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:00:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49131 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ob6p1-0002EK-9e for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:00:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46662 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ob6ov-0002EA-6r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:00:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6ot-0004Sw-SA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:00:53 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:51180) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6ot-0004Ss-Qb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:00:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6Mz-0006y5-Nk; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Leo Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 6675 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.127960751726777 (code B ref -1); Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2010 06:31:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6Mv-0006xq-HS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:31:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6Mt-0006xj-Hv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:31:55 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:53381) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6NG-0003Xf-QW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51751 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ob6NF-0006iT-ER for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6NE-0000Sa-CN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:17 -0400 Original-Received: from ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.132]:48114) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob6NE-0000SO-8P for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:16 -0400 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Original-Received: from cpc1-cmbg13-0-0-cust596.cmbg.cable.ntl.com ([86.9.122.85]:55295 helo=Victoria.local) by ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.158]:587) with esmtpsa (PLAIN:sl392) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) id 1Ob6NC-0007H3-0g (Exim 4.72) for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org (return-path ); Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:32:14 +0100 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:32:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:38678 Archived-At: RFC822, 2822, 5322 all seem very clear about the meaning and use of 'field' and 'header'. However in function names and arguments in message.el and Gnus, header usually means 'field' and headers means 'header'. Sometimes field is used directly to mean 'field' as in message-fetch-field. I find this inconsistency confusing. I think message.el and Gnus should follow the same terminology used in the RFCs mentioned above and other files, for example those in mail/, in Emacs to be consistent with their use of 'field' and 'header'. HTH, Leo