Update HeaderId to clarify the difference between Autosubmitted and Auto-Submitted #1083
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…uto-Submitted This was totally confusing for me why there are two header IDs in MimeKit with the quite very same header. I even suspected a bug or that it is just a legacy API-compatibility thing (one being deprecated, though not stated?). After some research it turns out, the header is actually defined. At least for the modern RFC3834 header the keywords are actually also defined by IANA: https://www.iana.org/assignments/auto-submitted-keywords/auto-submitted-keywords.xml (But you don't do mapping to an enum, so introducing this would change the API drastically and be a different/bigger task, so I thought for the code this may not be relevant.) So to clarify this and ease searching around the web and decrease potential confusion for other developers, IMHO, it is a good idea to just directly point out the basic difference in the (code) doc, directly where you are using it. For background, I am at jstedfast#938 (comment) here detecting auto-reply mails for which this header is very important.
rklec
commented
Oct 2, 2024
Improved wording
rklec
commented
Oct 2, 2024
| AutoSubmitted, | ||
|
|
||
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// The Autosubmitted header field. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| /// <remarks> | ||
| /// <note type="warning"> | ||
| /// <para>This is a legacy header as defined in <see href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2156"/>RFC2156</see>.</para> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- /// <para>This is a legacy header as defined in <see href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2156"/>RFC2156</see>.</para>
+ /// <para>This is a legacy header as defined in <see href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2156">RFC2156</see>.</para>You've got a typo there @jstedfast (introduced by my bad, sorry)
As GitHUb Actions points out.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This was totally confusing for me why there are two header IDs in MimeKit with the quite very same header. I even suspected a bug or that it is just a legacy API-compatibility thing (one being deprecated, though not stated?).
After some research it turns out, the header is actually defined. At least for the modern RFC3834 header the keywords are actually also defined by IANA: https://www.iana.org/assignments/auto-submitted-keywords/auto-submitted-keywords.xml (But you don't do mapping to an enum, so introducing this would change the API drastically and be a different/bigger task, so I thought for the code this may not be relevant.)
So to clarify this and ease searching around the web and decrease potential confusion for other developers, IMHO, it is a good idea to just directly point out the basic difference in the (code) doc, directly where you are using it.
For background, I am at #938 (comment) here detecting auto-reply mails for which this header is very important.