On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:47:51 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 02:58:24PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> >> A bottom posting style does not mean "all the stuff goes to the >> >> bottom" >> > >> > Yes it does! That is what bottom posting is. >> >> No sir, is just the name what is misleading. "Bottom posting" also >> applies for an inline style. Regardless its name, the main idea remains >> the same: the reply goes below of the text you are responding. > > So what's it called when you plonk everything at the bottom, oops sorry, > at the very end? End posting? That's also "bottom posting". No need to reinvent the wheel all the time. >> > There is also "conversation style" or "interleaved style" which is >> > the tried and proven preferred way for mailing lists; i.e the style >> > you and many others use. >> >> That's also bottom posting ;-) > > No, you are confused. (...) That's *your* own interpretation of a well-defined well-known concept and of course, *you* can call them as you wish. I prefer to stick to what everybody else understand for it, which BTW, has been referenced in this same thread (by me), in a form of link to Wikipedia article about this issue: *** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting In the "bottom-posting" style, the reply is appended to a full or partial copy of the original message. The name bottom-posting is sometimes used for inline-style replies, and indeed the two formats are the same when only one point is being replied to. *** > Therefore, it makes sense to have *THREE* different definitions. > correct? (...) Not at all when two of them (inline and bottom posting) share 99% of their features. Feel free to edit the Wikipedia article to match your own opinion ;-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jls6o8$f2u$5...@dough.gmane.org
