Generally, you wouldn't know what the message id is (there are exceptions*)
until the message is sent and moved to the Sent Items folder.
Even if you have the message id, it is not quaranteed that the reply will
include "In-Reply-To" header. Older versions of Outlook never added that
header.
* - Exchange 2003/2007 always adds the PR_INTERNET_MESSAGE_ID property as
soon as a message is created. You must be in the online mode to see it for
the new messages.
Dmitry Streblechenko (MVP)
http://www.dimastr.com/
OutlookSpy - Outlook, CDO
and MAPI Developer Tool
"Markus" wrote in message
...
Dmitry,
Thanks. I understand that SMTP protocol requires a message ID with each
email sent and for it to be included in the reply. Do you know whether
this
id would allow me to track replies?
I will try experimenting with this, but thought you might know if this
would
be waste of time.
Thanks again,
Mark
"Dmitry Streblechenko" wrote:
Outlook searches for the PR_CONVERSATION_TOPIC (Subject without any
prefixes) MAPI property.
You could use the value of PR_CONVERSATION_INDEX to search for all
message
in the discussion topic, but it is not guaranteed that the recipient's
reply
will preserve it.
Dmitry Streblechenko (MVP)
http://www.dimastr.com/
OutlookSpy - Outlook, CDO
and MAPI Developer Tool
"Markus" wrote in message
...
When I send an email thru Outlook using my application, I would like to
tag
the email with a unique number. I would like this number to be
returned
in
any reply.
I know I could use the subject line or body for this number and it
should
get back in a reply, but I would like to use a property that is not
visible
to the user and not able to be modified by them.
When you run Outlook it has an option to list all related emails. I
would
not think it would use a subject line that would not necessarily be
unique
to
one thread, but rather must use some code not visible to the user that
all
emails and replys must share. Hope someone here has an idea on what
that
is
and if it is available to the programmer.
Many thanks for any ideas on this,
Mark