On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 06:46:57PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote: > 1. Do we really want people "subscribing" to mailing lists using atom > over http? This would consume way more resources than a standard > mailing list subscription (due to the polling nature of atom). I don't > have any evidence, but this worrys me.
I thought they were static files? > 2. There are several formats for each mail message (regular, raw, mime). > Probably the links to everything other than the standard format should > use the rel="nofollow" modifier to keep the search engines out. Keeping > the robots off of 2/3 of the links could make a big difference in load > considering the number of pages on this site. *shrug* > 3. We should probably turn on the email-address-obfiscation feature. I > personally would prefer if everyone could just use proper spam > filtering, but I think the general expectation nowadays is that we try > to avoid displaying raw addresses. I think this feature is lame (and said so when it was proposed). Spammers are just going to de-obfuscate anyway. Enabling this provides a false layer of security that does no one any good. > 4. The non-ajax form of the site could probably use a little more > attention. It is usuable, but a little "dirty" in places (overlapping > boxes, too-big fonts, etc). Agreed. -- justin
