Clickable hyperlinks

[Deborah Swanson]

Michael Torrie wrote, on January 03, 2017 8:05 PM
> 
> On 01/03/2017 08:46 PM, Deborah Swanson wrote:
> > Actually it is, or at least it doesn't happen in all email readers. 
> > Mine, for instance, never breaks up threads.
> 
> Mine doesn't either, which illustrates the issue. This  
> message, for example appears under a long thread that started 
> out life as "mentor training python Romania with 
> certification" and then changed to "Cleaning up conditionals" 
> and then changed to "Clickable hyperlinks." All in one 
> thread. My client doesn't break them up because they all tie 
> together via the message-id header.
> 
> And most of us would not like our client to break a thread 
> just because the subject changes. Often in long conversations 
> there are twists and turns in the discussion and sometimes 
> side-paths are explored, and the subject often is changed to 
> reflect this.  With a truly threaded email reader (one that 
> shows a tree of messages, not just chronological order), this 
> works out very well.  So if a discussion has a natural 
> evolution into various other topics, it is often considered 
> okay to just change the subject but continue the thread. 
> Other times, it's better to start a new thread.  Where that 
> line is is hard to say!
> 
> > I did say in the message you're replying to that I will try to 
> > remember to start new threads with brand new messages. 
> (Even though I 
> > think pipermail's behavior is a bug, that's what many 
> people read the 
> > list
> > from.)
> 
> Sounds good.
> 
> I don't know of anyone that reads on the pipermail archive, 
> except in response to web searches.  Most people use clients 
> of some kind, NNTP or email.  And those that group messages 
> according to message-id (most clients except for ones that 
> try to be smart like Gmail web or Outlook) will show all the 
> topics I mentioned before as one giant thread, which is by 
> design (that's what message-id headers are for).

I suppose. Times change of course, which always suits some and not
others. Personally, I think putting messages that have different titles
all in one thread is a bad design, but as I've said a couple of times
now I intend to comply with the new rules. But compliance doesn't imply
agreement. I prefer the old system, which ordered threads by titles, but
there's obviously no pleasing everyone on this issue.