On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> I've always wondered about adding the "was Re" appendage. I mean, if you
> are following the old thread it should be obvious what's happening. If
> you haven't been following the old thread, then it doesn't help you to
> know that the new one grew out of the old one.
*shrug*
I liked it because, independent of your particular mail client's threading
capabilities (or lack thereof), it allows you to put things in cognitive
context. If I'm reading from message to message in Pine, seeing a "new"
subject that quotes old material can be confusing, but having that 'was
re:...' text in there puts it back in context without necessarily having
to go back out to the message list to see how things were threaded.
I suppose it can be redundant, but good redundancy can be good UI, no?
--
Chris Devers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cursor address, n.
"Hello, cursor!"
-- from _The Computer Contradictionary_, Stan Kelly-Bootle, 1995
