Point of information, please
There has recently been some scolding about hi-jacking a thread, one of the most recent being with a thread called Bridge software, which I have unfortunately already sent to Limbo. I didn't perceive any such hi-jacking in the thread, which apparently had one question and two or three responses, all relevant. So I am a bit confused. A related question is this: Is it concidered within the bound of Netiquette to send a threaded subject with, say, "SOLVED" at the end? How about a subject which I recently sent, where I added "--more" at the end, to distinguish it from a previous post that I had sent with the same subject. (The one with "--more" had further information.) This message was actually sent using the fwd command, i.e., suse-linux-e@suse.com 10:49 PM 2/2/2006 -0500 1 Fwd: Re: [SLE] OCR software--more and I never saw it on the list. I make no secret of reading and replying using Eudora Pro 4.0 in Windows-- I'm really happier with it than KMail, which is certainly usable, but I don't like the way it works. (Of necessity, I recently gave KMail about a week's trial.) In case that message never did get to the list, I will briefly reiterate: they seem to be looking at porting Omnipage to Linux, if there is enough interest. Or perhaps I misunderstand: perhaps what they really want is a Linux maven to port it for them. Anyway: www.nuance.com/omnipage/capturesdk/linux/ --doug -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.2/251 - Release Date: 2/4/2006
Doug, On Monday 06 February 2006 11:06, Doug McGarrett wrote:
There has recently been some scolding about hi-jacking a thread, one of the most recent being with a thread called Bridge software, which I have unfortunately already sent to Limbo.
I didn't perceive any such hi-jacking in the thread, which apparently had one question and two or three responses, all relevant.
The post was on-topic for the list. What is being objected to as "hijacking" is the use of the mail client's "reply" function to start a brand new topic. Many of us use mailers that organize messages into hierarchical structures based on replies (these structures are called threads). This is done not by the subject (*) but by examining normally hidden header fields. Thus hitting "reply" and altering the subject, as some find more convenient than either typing a posting address or creating an address book entry, puts the message into the thread hiearachy of the message that was the target of the "reply" command when it belongs as a "top-level" message that begins a thread of its own. (*) Some mailers will organize pseudo-threads based on subject or will have an option to use subject fields in addition to explicit In-Reply-To headers to place a message into a thread.
So I am a bit confused. A related question is this:
Is it concidered within the bound of Netiquette to send a threaded subject with, say, "SOLVED" at the end?
It's certainly acceptable and many consider it to be beneficial, with one caveat: Only the the original poster (the "OP") should make such a declaration, since only that person can truly know whether their problem was solved.
How about a subject which I recently sent, where I added "--more" at the end, to distinguish it from a previous post that I had sent with the same subject. (The one with "--more" had further information.)
In fact, you should have used "reply," so that the second post, the one that amplified or completed the original, would be in the same thread as the original.
This message was actually sent using the fwd command,
The mail client's forward command should be used for--get this--forwarding the mail to someone outside the audience of the original posting.
i.e., suse-linux-e@suse.com 10:49 PM 2/2/2006 -0500 1 Fwd: Re: [SLE] OCR software--more and I never saw it on the list. I make no secret of reading and replying using Eudora Pro 4.0 in Windows-- I'm really happier with it than KMail, which is certainly usable, but I don't like the way it works. (Of necessity, I recently gave KMail about a week's trial.)
Eudora is a good client and it has some features I still miss in KMail, but they're few and non-essential. KMail is a superb mail client, but these are matters of opinion. And it doesn't run on any of the platforms that support Eudora (to my knowledge).
In case that message never did get to the list, I will briefly reiterate: they seem to be looking at porting Omnipage to Linux, if there is enough interest. Or perhaps I misunderstand: perhaps what they really want is a Linux maven to port it for them. Anyway:
www.nuance.com/omnipage/capturesdk/linux/
--doug
Randall Schulz
Randall R Schulz wrote:
The post was on-topic for the list. What is being objected to as "hijacking" is the use of the mail client's "reply" function to start a brand new topic. Many of us use mailers that organize messages into hierarchical structures based on replies (these structures are called threads). This is done not by the subject (*) but by examining normally hidden header fields.
The Message-ID field in particular.
(*) Some mailers will organize pseudo-threads based on subject or will
One might be tempted to say "pseudo-mailers" :-) /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - managed anti-spam and anti-virus solution. Let us analyse your spam- and virus-threat - up to 2 months for free.
Per, On Monday 06 February 2006 12:53, Per Jessen wrote:
Randall R Schulz wrote:
The post was on-topic for the list. What is being objected to as "hijacking" is the use of the mail client's "reply" function to start a brand new topic. Many of us use mailers that organize messages into hierarchical structures based on replies (these structures are called threads). This is done not by the subject (*) but by examining normally hidden header fields.
The Message-ID field in particular.
Actually, the link itself is the value in the In-Reply-To field. It refers to the Message-ID of the replied-to message. This makes the In-Reply-To value like a foreign key in a relational database with the Message-Id as the primary key.
(*) Some mailers will organize pseudo-threads based on subject or will
One might be tempted to say "pseudo-mailers" :-)
Well, KMail has the "Thread Message also by Subject" option, but it's about the best mail client I've ever used. The last I used Eudora, the lack of true threading was its biggest weakness. It would group messages by subject, but that alone is a very weak organizing principle.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Randall Schulz
Randall R Schulz wrote:
Actually, the link itself is the value in the In-Reply-To field. It refers to the Message-ID of the replied-to message. This makes the In-Reply-To value like a foreign key in a relational database with the Message-Id as the primary key.
OK, I should have left "field", and just said Message-ID :-) I wonder what the "References:" field is intended for though. It seems to record all previous messages in the thread?
Well, KMail has the "Thread Message also by Subject" option, but it's about the best mail client I've ever used.
I haven't used the newer versions, but I wasn't too impressed with the 3.1/3.2 versions, I have to say. I don't use threading in my email-client (Thunderbird) anyway - I use Knode for reading e.g. this group. /Per Jessen, Zürich
Per, On Tuesday 07 February 2006 01:46, Per Jessen wrote:
Randall R Schulz wrote:
Actually, the link itself is the value in the In-Reply-To field. It refers to the Message-ID of the replied-to message. This makes the In-Reply-To value like a foreign key in a relational database with the Message-Id as the primary key.
OK, I should have left "field", and just said Message-ID :-) I wonder what the "References:" field is intended for though. It seems to record all previous messages in the thread?
That's how it looks to me. I haven't looked it up, though.
Well, KMail has the "Thread Message also by Subject" option, but it's about the best mail client I've ever used.
I haven't used the newer versions, but I wasn't too impressed with the 3.1/3.2 versions,
I'm not sure which versions you're referring to. The current (or near current) version is 1.9.1, but I agree a few years ago it was rather meager. Now it's great.
...
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Randall Schulz
Randall R Schulz wrote:
Well, KMail has the "Thread Message also by Subject" option, but it's about the best mail client I've ever used.
I haven't used the newer versions, but I wasn't too impressed with the 3.1/3.2 versions,
I'm not sure which versions you're referring to. The current (or near current) version is 1.9.1, but I agree a few years ago it was rather meager. Now it's great.
Uh, I was probably thinking of the KDE-versions it came with. Last I used KMail was in SuSE 9.0. Maybe it's time to have another look. /Per Jessen, Zürich
On 06/02/06, Randall R Schulz <rschulz@sonic.net> wrote: *snipped*
Eudora is a good client and it has some features I still miss in KMail, but they're few and non-essential. KMail is a superb mail client, but these are matters of opinion. And it doesn't run on any of the platforms that support Eudora (to my knowledge).
My apologies for going slightly off the main topic. If you are forced to use a Windows platform - or perhaps you don't mind either, such as myself - then you might like to look at Pegasus Mail <http://www.pmail.com/>. It is very, very similar to KMail in both it looks and how it does things. David Harris is also looking at moving over to Open Source with it. At the moment he is stymied by the fact that Pegasus uses a proprietary editor which, of course, rules out OSS for now. I believe he is also looking at trying to port over to Linux. Anyway, Pegasus runs on Windows at the moment. -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== Xmas may be over but, PLEASE DON'T drink and drive you'll make it to the next one that way. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-02-06 at 14:06 -0500, Doug McGarrett wrote:
How about a subject which I recently sent, where I added "--more" at the end, to distinguish it from a previous post that I had sent with the same subject. (The one with "--more" had further information.) This message was actually sent using the fwd command, i.e., suse-linux-e@suse.com 10:49 PM 2/2/2006 -0500 1 Fwd: Re: [SLE] OCR software--more and I never saw it on the list.
I did: 6203 Feb 2 Doug McGarrett (3191) Fwd: Re: [SLE] OCR software--more But as you sent it as a forwarded mail, the threading information mentioned by Randall was lost, and your email misplaced. Look, this was the whole thread - and sorted as "thread": * 6113 Feb 1 Ken Schneider (2964) . [SLE] OCR software 6114 Feb 1 Dylan (3518) . |-> 6115 Feb 1 Ken Schneider (3560) | |-> 6116 Feb 1 John Pettigrew (4200) |-> 6117 Feb 1 russbucket (3381) |-> 6118 Feb 1 Doug McGarrett (3724) . |-> 6119 Feb 2 kai (4860) | |-> 6120 Feb 2 nathan (3189) |-> 6121 Feb 1 Jim Flanagan (4054) |-> 6122 Feb 6 T. Ribbrock (3301) |-> Your email is missing from there, it appeared as an independent one, and misplaced.
I make no secret of reading and replying using Eudora Pro 4.0 in Windows-- I'm really happier with it than KMail, which is certainly usable, but I don't like the way it works. (Of necessity, I recently gave KMail about a week's trial.)
Interestingly, amavis-new says something very weird: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FORGED_MUA_EUDORA autolearn=disabled version=3.1.0 It says you are faking Eudora, and you say you are using Eudora - thus, amavis, once more, is incorrectly scoring mail :-/ - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFD5+8itTMYHG2NR9URAonJAJ9qNJoalWBzYg2We8uFxcYeIjS8nwCeKWpc V5ul01a+CzdeeY3JoBFVSHs= =tGn0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
* Carlos E. R. <robin1.listas@tiscali.es> [02-06-06 20:55]:
Your email is missing from there, it appeared as an independent one, and misplaced.
The "References:" header was missing. I believe that he started a *new* message and retyped the Subject, rather than responding to an existing message and amending the Subject. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
* Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri@gmail.com> [02-06-06 23:12]:
* Carlos E. R. <robin1.listas@tiscali.es> [02-06-06 20:55]:
Your email is missing from there, it appeared as an independent one, and misplaced.
The "References:" header was missing. I believe that he started a *new* message and retyped the Subject, rather than responding to an existing message and amending the Subject.
Correcting myself, further investigation reveals he forwarded the message which destroys the 'References:' header and breaks the thread. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
participants (6)
-
Carlos E. R. -
Doug McGarrett -
Kevanf1 -
Patrick Shanahan -
Per Jessen -
Randall R Schulz