Tony Finch wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, W B Hacker wrote: > >>Tony Finch wrote: >> >>>Boggle! How do you expect a thread-aware MUA to deal with your >>>messages sensibly when they have no thread information at all? Let >>>alone "less" thread-aware MUAs. >> >>As in the screenshot: http://conducive.org/threading.tiff > > > There's no threading there. That's just sorting by subject with some bogus > scaffolding on the left-hand-side.
Not what is set in Mozilla, nor does it look the same if I DO sort on subkect. ...but never mind. > Note that you don't have more than one > level of nesting, - for which I am grateful... > as (for example) the pipermail archive does. > See how Pine shows it, with nesting: http://dotat.at/graphics/pine.png > In particular see how the "ACL to reject spam" and MailScanner threads > have a structure that your screenshot doesn't show, and how the structure > of various threads has been flattened by your replies. True - but even with a 1400-wide screen, that is what I would want anyway. Sub-branching ad infinitum may be technically correct, and certinly useful in an environment where side-issues fell into clear categories, (Groklaw, maybe?) but for most technical support lists the differentiation is not worth the cost of the back-and-fill navigation. *snip* > > References and In-Reply-To. > > Tony. Thanks. Working on that now. Bill -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
