- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:08:34 -0500
- To: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org, Brian Kelly <b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>, David Peaslee <peasleed@lanecc.edu>
At 09:25 PM 2001-01-22 +0000, Nick Kew wrote: >On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Al Gilman wrote: > > >> <meta name="SMTP-equiv" value="Errors-To:<edress>"> > >That doesn't make much sense to me. Site Valet (when not set just >to mail to a subscriber's address) will use either of the more >conventional > > <link rev="made" href="<mailto:author@domain>mailto:author@domain"> > <meta name="author" content="<mailto:author@domain>mailto:author@domain"> > >and default to webmaster@domain as last resort. > Maybe it makes more sense to work on sites to all support webmaster@domain with content-aware filters so EARL reports will get parsed. But the idea was not to replace the author info but to augment it. If we don't make it a different reserved term then authors are going to get it in the ear at sites where there is someone else who should be getting that. The idea I was exploring was to establish separate conventions for the content point of contact and the technical (bugs) point of contact. This is often done in visible plain links, does it make sense to try to promulgate a common practice? From: and Errors-To: are two distinct things in mail headers. You shouldn't have to default to <webmaster@domain> the webmaster should have a machine-interpretable way to tell you just where they want such mail to go.
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 18:59:16 UTC