You are talking about evidential mail, I am talking about
conversational.
A threading mail reader is entirely irrelevant to me for conversational
mail, because I delete each mail as I read it.
Now, if anybody reading this wonders what the hell I am talking about
all they have to do is scroll down to find out. Oh no they can't,
somebody snipped it all!
Just because a few erudite people have agreed that bottom posting is
best doesn't make it the one true way. Not even if one of them is you
Midge!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: GP-UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adrian Midgley
Sent: 16 May 2004 11:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Functionality of NHSNet (still, given the choice of
technologies)
On Saturday 15 May 2004 23:14, Stephen Crawshaw wrote:
> And many "preview" panels only show the top part of an e-mail. If
> top-posted one can read and deal with such more rapidly.
But both of these ideas suggest several things:-
That the whole content of the correspondence to date will be in each
sucessive
email
That there will be neither need nor benefit to replying point by point
instead
writing a whole "letter".
That the replies will not include some small correction, as of a single
word -
likely corrected to possible for instance.
That the correspondence is between only two people, or is constrained so
that
each participant takes turn in posting - otherwise there are _different_
sequences flying about... removing every claimed virtue quite
thoroughly.
(and that the email clients in use are brain dead and don't thread,
whic is
the main reason for it.)
Stephen's point is particularly perverse, in that if you are not going
to
_read_ the tail of correspondence, is it actually beneficial to have it
lugged around, rather than being present in a threaded sequence of
emails,
each of which will have its main content visible in the preview panel as
you
pass over it.
Would anyone want a conferencing system (which the NHS users of the
poorly
threading top-quoting MS clients are tending to offer as an alternative
(perhaps more since it allows the whole correspondence to be removed
more
handily than if it has been copied hither and thither, and thus gives
the
appearance of control) that quoted the whole of each thread into each
leaf of
the tree? Although I see unthreaded conferencing systems have now been
invented - who'd a thought it.
--
Adrian Midgley (Linux desktop)
GP, Exeter
http://www.defoam.net/
|