[Mailman-Developers] Feature Request - Interactive HTML Digests

[Tanstaafl]

On 2/20/2010 10:53 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Tanstaafl writes:
> Exactly.  "Special HTML" and "lowest common denominator HTML" don't
> mix.  (Yes, that's mere word play, but in this case the parallel
> happens to work.)

Well... I only meant special in the sense of the use case... not the
HTML code that would be needed.

> My users expect to be able to view the messages in a digest as an 
> email folder. That's the most important digest feature for them;

I wouldn't have had a clue what you're talking about here, but maybe
you're talking about the Vi-in-Emacs feature Barry mentioned?

If so, that's fine - I'm not suggesting that the current digest
offerings be changed in any way, shape or form, so implementation of
this feature request wouldn't affect your users in the slightest.

> they do not want to have to page through messages they don't care
> about to get to the ones they do care about,

Nor do I, but I don't use Vi-in-Emacs, so my feature request is to allow
a way for people who don't use it to be able to use digests but not have
to page through messages they don't care about to get to the ones they
do, and easily interact with them without breaking threading for
everyone else.

Oh - and if you aren't talking about Vi-in-Emacs, no offense was
intended, and I'd really like to know what you meant by 'view the
messages in a digest in an email folder'... :)

> and they expect to use their normal MUA commands, not HTML fragment
> addresses in links, to navigate.

See above. No one would force anyone to choose this new digest version.

> Really?  I haven't had a problem like that for 15 years.  (But then,
> I've exclusively used Emacs-based MUAs for 25 years, which might have
> something to do with it.)

Ya think? ;)

> I think you should post a bug report (weirdly enough) to the Mailman
> project on Launchpad.net.  There's also a wiki page for Mailman 3 (I
> forget the address exactly but it's linked from http://www.list.org/)
> that you could update.

Thanks, I'll do one of those tomorrow (gotta run now)...

> You don't have to do it yourself, but if that doesn't get done by
> somebody, experience shows that the request tends to get lost.

I know - I've really been making a nuisance of myself on the Mozilla
Bugzilla for that very reason...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles