(In reply to John Bieling (:TbSync) from comment #7) > But opening a message can be done in a new tab, in a new window and in the current mail3-pane, so I do not know how good that mixes with a standard url-open-function which will probably only support a standard location to load the message. One could think about that as a link with target attribute, or not. Distinguishing between open in tab vs window is more problematic, and if considering the browser equivalence, just a user preference that the api should not fiddle with. Furthermore, I do not know if mid: urls are unique. Don't they rely on the messageHeaderId, which is not uniqe? Using the messages API ID will open a specific message, regardless if there are multiple messages with the same messageHeaderId. Yes mids are not guaranteed to lead to the same physical copy of the message. They will lead to the same *message* though. It's rather unclear why anyone should care about which of the (same) messages are opened. I'm sure there may be cases, but there's certainly the case for letting perfect being the enemy of the good here.
Bug 1603489 Comment 8 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
(In reply to John Bieling (:TbSync) from comment #7) > But opening a message can be done in a new tab, in a new window and in the current mail3-pane, so I do not know how good that mixes with a standard url-open-function which will probably only support a standard location to load the message. One could think about that as a link with target attribute, or not. Distinguishing between open in tab vs window is more problematic, and if considering the browser equivalence, just a user preference that the api should not fiddle with. > Furthermore, I do not know if mid: urls are unique. Don't they rely on the messageHeaderId, which is not uniqe? Using the messages API ID will open a specific message, regardless if there are multiple messages with the same messageHeaderId. Yes mids are not guaranteed to lead to the same physical copy of the message. They will lead to the same *message* though. It's rather unclear why anyone should care about which of the (same) messages are opened. I'm sure there may be cases, but there's certainly the case for letting perfect being the enemy of the good here.