From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D57E1C2E for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 16:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708447846; cv=none; b=Fn3vEZI3ub9pCfgvs87USn59hSLvBIa6jSMlXwqo9RzN7P33hC5+R9nSSIJJLW++Mfu6ViwvGD7Bad6wUkRh30g6PPK6td5ChleUKShQa7lgQsS5gPN0nWiDvdGSjLNj3zJ9DiwaH4X5OkDZBHcbjDWZhH6DLfDx8C00aZ6slV0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708447846; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZsD/Kk/SNlLJ7d1WdNH7DiOVfXF1QfgwgsGewQ1+yCI=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=bNgBpOohgHfTOnagjZ2Rd+aSKcxVosao2E4Qi56gOaWUYSfEAOgxGekyEeznQUMAN7kT23eMBiUKO3FCdLqr+eQKAKRIZjG43/vsl+3Y4dDHlL2Q2XRBW54jeEeIrp2RvxloiA08Iorqi8rFYiFw5cD0SJ/CQi9N3bkZUP7fVZI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=I2keFYWJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="I2keFYWJ" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1708447841; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=l8SH9RyvEkavN8W5ve9pauZsMV8PI0e4olV4yHkROyw=; b=I2keFYWJiNTBk7jZ8A/Sx2EITkE5uO337jOP5S33MODJAkXirgcy8Tb5nv2XoprD+ZjJgy 2+k5ucaMZrH/3O1FCgAr4iADLkg1jIAD9LJ56bwlG6zG7eBrTM+Vy4suWKF8+Vt5t0eY/y VVaKG4dnD19CjYYwo8ciEqm5qT6AW+VPBGIvpE/zpkeLgsscZNihfkY+bKyBb3FUB0DCsb ni3GcDbn2oPVFdeRnWuDFjwoZSim9h6Tv2YUIzxZGMjVdgBeBUXMexsu1KOG6b1lZZZsX8 vOO47FEUMtUVrKYkCXb+w3i+2SVp8piK0bW+kkdXu8zJGTfrq9F6c42z6A6mMg== Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 17:50:41 +0100 From: Dragan Simic To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] documentation: send-email: use camel case consistently In-Reply-To: <9d0022ba5666223af94bbf450909b1ba@manjaro.org> References: <33abb630c1d089e39ff48f04e586b1c0@manjaro.org> <9d0022ba5666223af94bbf450909b1ba@manjaro.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2024-02-20 17:29, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-02-20 17:22, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Dragan Simic writes: >> >>> Though, "CC" should remain written as "Cc", because it's the way >>> email >>> headers are capitalized, which "Cc" refers to. >> >> E-mail headers are case insensitive, though. See above ;-). > > I've never ever seen anyone referring to email headers as "TO", "CC" or > "BCC". It's always referred to as "To", "Cc" and "Bcc". > > Moreover, RFC2076 [1] refers to them as "To", "cc" and "bcc". This > makes it debatable whether "Cc" and "Bcc" are formally the right forms > to use in regular conversations, but also makes it clear they aren't > to be treated as abbreviations. > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2076 Here are a few more interesting links: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_copy - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=212059 - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50826 Thus, "cc" stems from the old age of literal carbon copies, and "bcc" was seemingly coined when email took over. Technically, "CC" and "BCC" (or "cc" and "bcc") _are_ abbreviations, but the slightly incorrect "Cc" and "Bcc" forms simply became widespread and took over. If you insist on using "CC", I'd be fine with that, but frankly, I think that would actually be confusing to the users.