----- Original Message ----- From: "Kurt Bigler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jesse Guardiani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:45 AM Subject: Re: [sqwebmail] new file proposal
> on 2/26/03 7:45 PM, Jesse Guardiani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kurt Bigler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Jesse Guardiani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:09 PM > > Subject: Re: [sqwebmail] new file proposal > > > > > >> on 2/26/03 7:40 AM, Jesse Guardiani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > > Maybe that's a hokey way to implement it... but it made sense at the time, and > > I can't think of a real compelling reason to change > > it. > > Well it sounds like you are agreeing with this catch, but that you aren't a > purist. Correct me if I'm wrong, because that is my assumption for going > on. I am a purist not for the sake of purity alone, but because it has > implications for the (server admin) user. If you leave it the way it is... > > It draws attention to a separate situation that is not really separate. It > makes people think about what the separate thing means, when in fact they > didn't have to think about it at all. It obscures the power of the original > wildcard notation - it will actually prevent the mind of the person > assimilating the doc from being able to grasp something because they will > have assimilated something not thought out - a contradiction. If the reader > doesn't realize the contradiction consciously then their understanding of > the whole thing is reduced. If they do realize it consciously it will make > them believe they are missing something else - there must be something else > - what does this documentation really mean? > > In my mind this is worth fixing. Are you sure that if you were to just > remove the option that the *:* method would just not already work in your > existing implementation? I'm not sure it would, but it seems possible. > Then you can just tell people that the allvirtual option was unnecessary. > > Sorry, I wish I had gotten this to you in time to prevent extra trouble. > But I do really think the quality of sqwebmail will be better if its > documentation isn't confusing the user with features that don't need to > exist. To be honest, I try not to think about it that much. I think this whole file will be a bit hard for some people to understand, but others will get it just fine. I'll just write the best docs I can, then answer my lot of the questions on the mailing list. > > -Kurt > > >
