On 2024-02-20 17:29, Dragan Simic wrote:
On 2024-02-20 17:22, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Dragan Simic <dsimic@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
