Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
David Jaques-Watson
(27 Apr 2014 00:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
Kurt Feltenberger
(27 Apr 2014 01:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
shadow@xxxxxx
(27 Apr 2014 02:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
Kurt Feltenberger
(27 Apr 2014 03:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
shadow@xxxxxx
(27 Apr 2014 08:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
Freelance Traveller
(27 Apr 2014 02:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
Kurt Feltenberger
(27 Apr 2014 04:01 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters
shadow@xxxxxx
(27 Apr 2014 08:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: SimpleLists, or Cordite? and thread-breaking posters Freelance Traveller (27 Apr 2014 02:34 UTC)
|
On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 10:30:30 +1000, you wrote to Freelance Traveller: >Dear Folks – >Jeff wrote: >> Also, there are a few posters whose messages aren't threading; >When I reply, I put in my own Subject line (which is usually a copy-and-paste of the subject I’m replying to, plus “Re:” if required). >Have done for years. Especially since I get the digest version, and replying doesn’t automatically include the correct Subject. >Are you saying that this new-fangled mailing list gets confuffled by something I’ve been doing since 1995? It's not the list, and yes, you've been breaking threads as long as I can remember - it's only when you get very active that I notice it and remark on it. Back in the days when the list was on the Engineering department's servers at the University of Western Ontario, I was doing the same thing, for the same reason: replying to the digest inherently breaks threading, because the digest formats don't preserve the message-IDs of the individual messages, even if the digest is in the 'burstable' format. The list itself doesn't worry about threading; it's the recipients' email programs that handle that, based on the message-id and in-reply-to headers if they conform to standards. Some client programs - thank you, Microsoft - felt that just smushing together all the messages with the same subject line (modulo Re:s) as a "conversation", sorted strictly by date-time within the "conversation", was adequate, and since at the time they refused to conform to extant standards (and in some things, still do), some other clients - but not all - have added the user-configurable option to smush things together in "conversation" format. I don't, and won't, even though my client supports it, because I have EXTENSIVE "archives" of the TML on this computer (back to mid-2005), and subject lines often repeat, sometimes with gaps of YEARS. -- Jeff Zeitlin, Editor Freelance Traveller The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Fanzine and Resource xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com http://www.freelancetraveller.com http://freelancetraveller.downport.com/ ®Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of the trademark in this notice and in the referenced materials is not intended to infringe or devalue the trademark. Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following enterprises for hosting services: CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net) The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)