On Saturday 01 December 2007 14:31, Daniel Green wrote: > For some users in certain environments/clients it is clear that a > prefix would provide clarity. Don't make the assumption that everyone > is able to use the gmail web interface.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with GMail. Any even half-way capable mail client can filter on arbitrary header fields, regardless of whether or not they're typically shown in the message display. They are able to accommodate a list identification outside the Subject: header. In fact, if you think about the word itself, it is completely irrelevant to the forum on which any given message is posted. > So if some will be helped, as many responders to this post have > claimed, the question becomes, would titles prefixed by [jvm] degrade > quality for users who do not want it? Of course it would. It's an endlessly repeated piece of entirely redundant information, at least as far as Subject: headers are concerned. While there may be a small fraction of users who subscribe to only a handful of lists, those who subscribe to many naturally create separate folders for each subscription. For these people, adulterated Subject: headers are just that: adulterated; contaminated; befouled. I don't think list administrators should cater to users of impoverished mail clients or to users who cannot figure out how to use the capabilities their mail clients make available to them. Randall Schulz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
