[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mark Leisher]

Jungshik> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Mark Leisher wrote:
>> Oops.  I missed a spot.

Jungshik> Isn't this mistake implying that you're still in favor of 'sed'
Jungshik> over 'perl' for this kind of simple operation :-) ?

S.  Don't tell anyone :-)

Jungshik> It seems to me a bit ironic that those who must be aware of all
Jungshik> sorts of sed/awk wizadry try to do everything they used to do
Jungshik> with 'sed/awk/tr/uniq/join/sort/split/cut/' with perl
Jungshik> alone. For some cases, perl appears to me too 'heavy'.

I quite agree, but Perl is more likely to be on a Windows machine than sed.

I still enjoy hacking scripts with 'sed/awk/tr/uniq/join/sort/split/cut/';
there is a certain craftsman-like elegance to knowing and using the
appropriate tool for the job.

It won't be long before they all deal with Unicode/ISO10646 and we can get
back to constructing obfuscated shell scripts using our favorite set of
utils.  Perl puts too much emphasis on solving the problem and not enough on
the process of solving the problem :-)
-
Mark Leisher  Times are bad.  Children no longer obey
Computing Research Labtheir parents, and everyone is writing
New Mexico State University   a book.
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL-- Marcus Tullius Cicero
Las Cruces, NM  88003

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Yaap Pranger]

At 11:58 +0200 2001.03.27, Michael Everson wrote:
>At 18:04 +0200 2001-03-26, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
>
>>I cannot find a message by typing the first few letters of the 
>>subject (because they are always... guess what)
>
>Yes, this is the worst "feature" of this little experiment of 
>Sarasvati's. I use Eudora, and used to make use of this 
>functionality, but for Unicode messages, it's been taken away.
>
>I beseech thee, O effulgent one, to turn off this feature of the new 
>software.

Same for me, no way to Option_click on a subject and collect all the 
messages with a particular subject into a 'thread'. I would probably 
suffer a little less if I could believe that the [unicode] and [unicode] Re: 
feature makes some people happy . . .  

Sorry for the 'me too' content, I burned all my candles.   



-- 

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Jungshik Shin]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Marco Cimarosti wrote:

> Mark Leisher wrote:
> > >> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the
> > subject line easily with, for example, small perl script.
> >
> > % perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/);' messagefile
>
> I'd really need a thing like that but, unfortunately, I don't sit in front
> of a powerful Linux box with Perl and all the rest.
>
> Does anyone have a solution for MS Outlook under Windows NT?

 My reply to Mark Leisher's email(sent a moment ago) would have
helped you if your mail server were Unix-based (it doesn't matter what
mail client you're using. MS OE can take advantage of my recipe
based on procmail as it's a full-fledged IMAP4 client). Unfortunately,
it seems not judging from your mail header.

  However, there still may be something you can do about it. Why
don't you try filtering your MS OE mailbox (MS OE mailbox format is
almost? plain text, isn't it?) thru 'sed' or 'perl' (both of which are
available for Windows NT)?



> If I don't succeed stripping that "[unicode]" away, I am unable of following
> discussions. Questions sort far away from their replies; I cannot find a
> message by typing the first few letters of the subject (because they are
> always... guess what); even the feature "View by Conversation Topic" is made
> useless by the "Re:" being after "[unicode]".

 If MS OE can make use of 'References:' and 'In-Reply-To:' header in email
as well as in Usenet news(I know it does in Usenet news), you still
get threading ('true' treading as opposed to 'pseudo-threading' based
on Subject header) in quite a lot of  cases (trouble is not all mail
clients preserve or add these two headers to outgoing messages)

  BTW, I'm for removing '[unicode]' as it's causing some trouble
for some people and  there are  other ways to identify messages coming
from Unicode list (such as the address of the recipient unless one puts
the list address in Bcc: header. Even in that case, with now verbose
headers added by listtar, it's trivial to automatically identify messages
from the list and put  them in a separate folder if one wishes to)

  Jungshik Shin

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Jungshik Shin]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Mark Leisher wrote:

> Oops.  I missed a spot.

  Isn't this mistake implying that you're still in favor of
'sed' over 'perl' for this kind of simple operation :-) ?
It seems to me a bit ironic that those who must be aware of all
sorts of sed/awk wizadry try to do everything they used to do with
'sed/awk/tr/uniq/join/sort/split/cut/' with perl alone. For
some cases, perl appears to me too 'heavy'.


> % perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/); print;' messagefile

  I would (and I believe you would as well) do

  % sed '/^Subject: \[unicode\]/ s/ \[unicode\]//'  messagefile

(Don't tell me to invoke perl with '-pe' option :-) )


Better still, I'd just put the following line in my ~/.procmailrc

   :0 fw
 *^TO_.*[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 * ^Subject: [unicode]
  | sed 's/\[unicode\]//'
   :0 A
   unicode

This recipe applies to anyone whose mail server is Unix-based and works
with procmail (and supports IMAP) regardless of how and on what platform
(MacOS, MS-Windows, Unix, ...)  (s)he actually reads emails (as long as
the mail client/access method supports IMAP as well).  Without the last
two lines (which automatically puts messages from Unicode mailing list
into a separate mail folder named 'unicode' on the IMAP server), the
requirement for IMAP could be dropped and POP3 clients would work as well.

Those who find this a bit cryptic may (or may not) wish to point their
browser at .


  Jungshik Shin

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Michael Everson]

At 18:04 +0200 2001-03-26, Marco Cimarosti wrote:

>I cannot find a message by typing the first few letters of the 
>subject (because they are always... guess what)

Yes, this is the worst "feature" of this little experiment of 
Sarasvati's. I use Eudora, and used to make use of this 
functionality, but for Unicode messages, it's been taken away.

I beseech thee, O effulgent one, to turn off this feature of the new software.
-- 
Michael Everson  **  Everson Gunn Teoranta  **   http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Mob +353 86 807 9169 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Vox +353 1 478 2597
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn;  Baile an Bhóthair;  Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Erland Sommarskog]

"Christopher John Fynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Appending [unicode] does allow people to sort out messages from the list
> by sorting on Subject: which might be an advantage to subscribers with mail
> clients that can't filter mail - though I suspect there are very few (if
> any) subscribers to this list using mail clients which are that primitive.

Hey! I'm using mailx as I've done for the last 16 years. Whether it
can filter on subject I don't really know... In case you wonder: I
have a special subscription address for this list, and the messages
get into a separate mailbox.

Anyway, I don't really know what the outcome of the this [unicode]
discussion is, but my vote goes for removing it, It takes up ten valuable
positions in the already short Subject column in the message list
in mailx. Then again, if I get desperate, I could run a perl thing over it.
--
Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Jeff Guevin]

> Marco> Does anyone have a solution for MS Outlook under Windows NT?
> 
> Indeed.  The inability to do simple, obvious things in these programs is
> puzzling.  Is the gain of glitzy, distracting features worth the loss of real
> usability?

Outlook Express for Mac has an option to run AppleScripts using "Rules".  I
imagine the Windows version would have some similar way to extend the
abilities of the OE rule maker.

Jeff

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mike Lischke]

> Indeed.  The inability to do simple, obvious things in these programs is
> puzzling.  Is the gain of glitzy, distracting features worth the loss of real
> usability?

The inability to see the true culprit is much more puzzling. Do you really mean to 
charge a program
because it cannot handle something quite meaningless while there are so powerful other 
means? There
where enough good arguments why [unicode] in the subject line is superfluous, but I 
learned this
does not count at all. Fortunately, I don't depend on the subject line for filtering. 
I use the
rules manager of Outlook and this works fine for me.

Ciao, Mike

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mark Leisher]

Marco> I'd really need a thing like that but, unfortunately, I don't sit
Marco> in front of a powerful Linux box with Perl and all the rest.

Marco> Does anyone have a solution for MS Outlook under Windows NT?

Indeed.  The inability to do simple, obvious things in these programs is
puzzling.  Is the gain of glitzy, distracting features worth the loss of real
usability?

I'm glad Unicode hasn't lost all of the simple and obvious.  Yet.
-
Mark Leisher  Times are bad.  Children no longer obey
Computing Research Labtheir parents, and everyone is writing
New Mexico State University   a book.
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL-- Marcus Tullius Cicero
Las Cruces, NM  88003

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Marco Cimarosti]

Mark Leisher wrote:
> >> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the 
> subject line easily with, for example, small perl script.
> 
> Sean> Since this is so easy, could you send me one?
> 
> % perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/);' messagefile

I'd really need a thing like that but, unfortunately, I don't sit in front
of a powerful Linux box with Perl and all the rest.

Does anyone have a solution for MS Outlook under Windows NT?

If I don't succeed stripping that "[unicode]" away, I am unable of following
discussions. Questions sort far away from their replies; I cannot find a
message by typing the first few letters of the subject (because they are
always... guess what); even the feature "View by Conversation Topic" is made
useless by the "Re:" being after "[unicode]".

Thanks for any help.
_ Marco

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Marco Cimarosti]

Mark Leisher wrote:
> >> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the 
> subject line easily with, for example, small perl script.
> 
> Sean> Since this is so easy, could you send me one?
> 
> % perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/);' messagefile

I'd really need a thing like that but, unfortunately, I don't sit in front
of a powerful Linux box with Perl and all the rest.

Does anyone have a solution for MS Outlook under Windows NT?

If I don't succeed stripping that "[unicode]" away, I am unable of following
discussions. Questions sort far away from their replies; I cannot find a
message by typing the first few letters of the subject (because they are
always... guess what); even the feature "View by Conversation Topic" is made
useless by the "Re:" being after "[unicode]".

Thanks for any help.
_ Marco

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Daniel Biddle]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Sean O Seaghdha wrote:

> Ar 21 Mar 2001, ag 11:58 scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> fán ábhar "[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists":
> 
> > Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the subject line easily
> > with, for example, small perl script. 
> 
> Since this is so easy, could you send me one?

perl -pe 's/^(subject:.*)\[unicode\] /$1/i'

-- 
Daniel Biddle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mark Leisher]

Oops.  I missed a spot.

% perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/); print;' messagefile
-
Mark Leisher  Times are bad.  Children no longer obey
Computing Research Labtheir parents, and everyone is writing
New Mexico State University   a book.
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL-- Marcus Tullius Cicero
Las Cruces, NM  88003

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mark Leisher]

>> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the subject line easily
>> with, for example, small perl script.

Sean> Since this is so easy, could you send me one?

% perl -ne 's/\[unicode\]// if (/^Subject:/);' messagefile
-
Mark Leisher  Times are bad.  Children no longer obey
Computing Research Labtheir parents, and everyone is writing
New Mexico State University   a book.
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL-- Marcus Tullius Cicero
Las Cruces, NM  88003

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sean O Seaghdha]

Ar 21 Mar 2001, ag 11:58 scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
fán ábhar "[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists":

> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the subject line easily
> with, for example, small perl script. 

Since this is so easy, could you send me one?

`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~
 S e á n   Ó   S é a g h d h a   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.Oscar Wilde.

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Roozbeh Pournader]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Sean O Seaghdha wrote:

> I'll take the above private response as a request for everyone opposed to or 
> in favour of this piece of nonsense to e-mail Sarasvati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> with your opinion.  I trust Sarasvati will keep us apprised of the tally, the 
> proportion of non-voters, etc., etc. and is prepared to arrange for the 
> neccessary hand-counts and legal actions that will ensue.

I don't think so. The kind of reply you had received simply means that
Saravasti will not change it, without even being sorry for people like us
who consider it a pain :(

--roozbeh

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sean O Seaghdha]

Ar 23 Mar 2001, ag 1:44 scríobh Sarasvati 
fán ábhar "Re: Moving mail lists":

> At this moment, there are 691 addresses subscribed to
> the Unicode mail list. At least 24 of those entities
> are points of further fan-out to local lists elsewhere.
> If you can gather a list of at least 346 current
> subscribers who respond affirmatively to the question
> "should Sarasvati remove the [unicode] tag in the
> subject header?", then let it be considered that
> popular opinion is in your favor, and the tag will be
> removed.

Notwithstanding that

(a) I still think this is a stupid, unnecessary and pernicious "innovation" 
and as such should not be considered because of it's inconvenience to those 
who don't require it

and

(b) no such act of democracy was required to *institute* this unnecessary 
change

I'll take the above private response as a request for everyone opposed to or 
in favour of this piece of nonsense to e-mail Sarasvati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
with your opinion.  I trust Sarasvati will keep us apprised of the tally, the 
proportion of non-voters, etc., etc. and is prepared to arrange for the 
neccessary hand-counts and legal actions that will ensue.

`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~
 S e á n   Ó   S é a g h d h a   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, 
and that is not being talked about.   Oscar Wilde.

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Ayers, Mike]

> From: Roozbeh Pournader [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> 
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Sean O Seaghdha wrote:
> 
> > Please, please, please, can we not use this stupid 
> [unicode] addition to the 
> > subject line.  I agree with all the points that have been 
> made against it so 
> > far.  It's redundant, it wastes space and makes it harder 
> to visually find 
> > the message you want in a list.
> 
> What about voting? Can one run a voting web page for this? 
> Five levels,
> from "remove it at all prices" to "I seriously need that" 
> should be good.
> 

[building vote-bot...]


/|/|ike

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Roozbeh Pournader]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Sean O Seaghdha wrote:

> Please, please, please, can we not use this stupid [unicode] addition to the 
> subject line.  I agree with all the points that have been made against it so 
> far.  It's redundant, it wastes space and makes it harder to visually find 
> the message you want in a list.

What about voting? Can one run a voting web page for this? Five levels,
from "remove it at all prices" to "I seriously need that" should be good.

--roozbeh

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sean O Seaghdha]

Please, please, please, can we not use this stupid [unicode] addition to the 
subject line.  I agree with all the points that have been made against it so 
far.  It's redundant, it wastes space and makes it harder to visually find 
the message you want in a list.

Because this is such a high-volume list and I don't always read it regularly, 
it's important for me to be able to view the messages in a (pseudo-) thread 
view.  Unfortunately, now I have to go searching for the original message 
because it doesn't sort in the same place as the replies - all because of the 
addition of [unicode] to the subject line and the resulting (useless) 
position of the "Re:".

Surely the purpose of the subject header is to convey the subject of the 
message, so why overload it with extra redundant meaning?  Why expect good 
mail clients to understand this misuse of the subject header?

For the benefit of those who (through misfortune, laziness or just plain bad 
software) can't (or won't) sort their mail you have effectively broken my 
standards-compliant software.

It wasn't broken, so why "fix" it?

`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~
 S e á n   Ó   S é a g h d h a   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To see the essence in the unessential and to see the essence as
unessential means one can never get to the essence, wandering as
one is in the road of wrong intentions.  Dhammapada:11

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sean O Seaghdha]

Ar 21 Mar 2001, ag 23:06 scríobh Asmus Freytag 
fán ábhar "[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists":

> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 
> 
> Actually of more interest to me is the ability *not* to filter certain mail 
> lists until *after* I have read them in chronological sequence. Having the 
> subject tag allows me to know a messages context in such a situation, since 
> there is no way for me, currently, to show the TO header in the message 
> summary.

I had no idea Eudora was *so* primitive! ;)  Perhaps you should upgrade to a 
program that actually meets your needs?

http://www.pmail.com/


`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~
 S e á n   Ó   S é a g h d h a   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Ní féidir leis an ngobadán an dá thrá a fhreastal. Seanfhocal.

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sean O Seaghdha]

Ar 21 Mar 2001, ag 11:58 scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
fán ábhar "[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists":

> Those whom can filter their mail also can alter the subject line easily
> with, for example, small perl script. 

But by the same argument used by Asmus Freytag - not every system has PERL.  
Of course, you could also *add* the [unicode] with a PERL script too. :)

`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~:.,.:'^`~
 S e á n   Ó   S é a g h d h a   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Is iad na muca ciúine a itheann an mhin.   Seanfhocal.

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[J%ORG KNAPPEN]

I don't like the [unicode] prefix to all subject lines, because it eats up
too much of the valuable human readble subject line space. I could live with
it better, if it can be shortened to something like [uc], but the best
for me is dropping it at all.

And of course, there MUST NOT be any "Re: " after the tag, it must stand
in front of the tag.

Scanning over the Subjects, they all look like

"Re: [unicode] Re:"

to me -- almost no significant information in the first three words. This is
awfull

--J"org Knappen

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Sam Chapman]

the original message has a responding address at the bottom of the msg

[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

is this one on the list?

-Original Message-
From: John Wilcock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 22 March 2001 13:20
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [unicode] Re: Moving mail lists



On 22 Mar 2001 13:17:33 +0100, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> > Hideki summed it up best - I won't repeat his comment, go back and
> > read it.
> 
> I can not find any mail by any person by that name on this list.
> Perhaps that was a private reply?

Me neither, and that highlights another reason why filtering by
subject based on list tags is dangerous (particularly in the absence
of a Reply-to:  header) - it does not distinguish
between on-list and off-list replies to one's own contributions.

John.

-- 
-- Over 1500 webcams from ski resorts around the world -
http://www.snoweye.com/
-- Translate your technical documents and web pages-
http://www.tradoc.fr/en/

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[John Wilcock]

On 22 Mar 2001 13:17:33 +0100, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> > Hideki summed it up best - I won't repeat his comment, go back and
> > read it.
> 
> I can not find any mail by any person by that name on this list.
> Perhaps that was a private reply?

Me neither, and that highlights another reason why filtering by
subject based on list tags is dangerous (particularly in the absence
of a Reply-to:  header) - it does not distinguish
between on-list and off-list replies to one's own contributions.

John.

-- 
-- Over 1500 webcams from ski resorts around the world - http://www.snoweye.com/
-- Translate your technical documents and web pages- http://www.tradoc.fr/en/

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Marion Gunn]

Arsa [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> You are right, this may not be very useful for whom wish to filter
> their mail, but we better keep it in mind that this may be very useful
> for whom do not/can not filter their mail.  Those whom can filter
> their mail also can alter the subject line easily with, for example,
> small perl script.
>
> So I support current setup done by Sarasvati.
>
>

So do I. I still think Sarasvati could save himself some headaches by buying
LISTSERV,  rather than LISTAR, but I applaud his initiative in going for one
of the two most stable list management systems around, and I look forward to
just letting him get on with installing that.
mg

--
Marion Gunn
Everson Gunn Teoranta

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> At 03:38 AM 3/22/01 +, Christopher John Fynn wrote:
>>But you can also filter mails based on the To: header "To:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]" - every mail client I've seen that supports
>>filtering lets you filter based on that header.
> 
> Except if the message is a cc:...

Setups that have an option to filter messages based on addresses
should be clever enough to hunt through To: , Cc: and other relevant
headers anyway. 

However, sorting based on addresses is unreliable.  Suppose that you
have a mail going to several lists that you're subscribed to.  What
happens then?  And what happens if someone sends you a private copy of
a mail that is also going to the list?

> Actually of more interest to me is the ability *not* to filter
> certain mail lists until *after* I have read them in chronological
> sequence. Having the subject tag allows me to know a messages
> context in such a situation, since there is no way for me,
> currently, to show the TO header in the message summary.

As I've said before, relying on this information to be correct will
sooner or later produce incorrect results.  There are other ways to
produce the behaviour that you want, though they all require a bit
more work.

> Hideki summed it up best - I won't repeat his comment, go back and
> read it.

I can not find any mail by any person by that name on this list.
Perhaps that was a private reply?

-- 
Gaute Strokkeneshttp://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
I smell like a wet reducing clinic on Columbus Day!

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Asmus Freytag]

At 03:38 AM 3/22/01 +, Christopher John Fynn wrote:
>But you can also filter mails based on the To: header
>"To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" - every mail client I've seen that supports 
>filtering lets you filter based on that header.

Except if the message is a cc:...

Actually of more interest to me is the ability *not* to filter certain mail 
lists until *after* I have read them in chronological sequence. Having the 
subject tag allows me to know a messages context in such a situation, since 
there is no way for me, currently, to show the TO header in the message 
summary.

A./

PS: Unlike many on this list, I have been subscribing to a number of lists 
that follow this format and have learned to find it useful. Hideki summed 
it up best - I won't repeat his comment, go back and read it.

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Christopher John Fynn]

Asmus Freytag wrote:
 
> At 05:53 PM 3/21/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
> >lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
> >wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder of
> >its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
> >"X-list: unicode" .

> This is not supported on all mail clients.

But you can also filter mails based on the To: header
"To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" - every mail client I've seen that supports filtering lets 
you filter based on that header.
 
> I urge Sarasvati to stick with this setup.
> A./

(The Subject: line of this message demonstrates just what Gaute was talking about.)

Appending [unicode] does allow people to sort out messages from the list by sorting on 
Subject: which might be an advantage to subscribers with mail clients that can't 
filter mail - though I suspect there are very few (if any) subscribers to this list 
using mail clients which are that primitive. 
 
- Chris

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

Please fix your line lengths.  Your lines are much longer than 80
characters.

On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
>>In addition, it doesn't look too well if you cannot run your own
>>lists.  I mean, you can't imagine that the Unicode web site moves
>>over to GeoCities, can you? ;-)
> 
> The web server of course not, but the mailing list? To be honest it
> doesn't look so good as it is now. For every reply I have to edit
> the receiver,

Reply-To: munging (done by Yahoo, and which I assume is what you're
wishing for here) is bad.  The proper answer to your problem is to
have two distinct commands for replying to mail: one which says "I
want to compose a private reply to the person who wrote this mail" and
another one which says "I want to compose a reply to this mail which
can be read by everyone who the first mail"; typically called
"followup", "group reply", "list reply" or "wide reply".

> there is no complete archive,

Virtually every mailing list manager that I know of can produce
archives in an automated fashion.  I'd be extremely surprised if
Listar can not.  There is no reason to go to Yahoo for this.

In fact, if I remember correctly Yahoo can not produce archives in
standard mailbox format--you have to use the web interface.  This
means that, for instance, you can not simply download the archive for
a given time period and slurp it into you email client.

> I cannot post from every place I would like to etc.

Why not?

> But this is all technical.

Off course the single most annoying thing about Yahoo lists are the
advertisements at the bottom.  It is just about possible to have one's
email client hide them, but since people are generally lazy and will
inevitably forget to snip them when quoting someone, you get to read
them anyway.

-- 
Gaute Strokkeneshttp://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
I want to TAKE IT HOME and DRESS IT UP in HOT PANTS!!

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> At 05:53 PM 3/21/01 +0100, you wrote:
>>I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
>>lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
>>wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder
>>of its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
>>"X-list: unicode" .
> 
> This is not supported on all mail clients.

It is supported by all except for the most badly broken mail clients.
A mail client with no ability to sort mail at all is broken, and one
that is clever enough to sort based on the subject but not any other
header even more so.  There are many, many decent (and free) mail
clients available, and there is no reason why the rest of us should be
made to suffer to accommodate those who can't be bothered to download
one.

-- 
Gaute Strokkeneshttp://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
Is it FUN to be a MIDGET?

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> I agree with the ads-issue but you will get used with that little
> four-liner.

This is a proof by blatant assertion.  I'm on a couple of Yahoo lists,
and I really hate the ads.

> Many people have a longer signature (also on this list).

Well, they shouldn't... 8-)  Remember that the ad comes in _addition_
to the signature.  Additionally, it is not preceded by "-- ^M^J" which
would ensure that decent email clients would remove it automatically
when replying.  Partially as a result of this, many people do
unfortunately not bother to remove them when replying, which is even
more annoying.

> Managing through web or "command line" is a matter of taste and
> cannot be discussed.

Sure it can.  Many mailing list interfaces give you the choice
(Mailman springs to mind) but with Yahoo, you _have_ to do it by web.

>> While Yahoo groups may have a powerful server and backbone the
>> amount of traffic on that server and backbone means that it would
>> not necessarily be any faster than the current set-up.
> 
> Also agreed. I want to point out that their servers are at least as
> reliable as the one currently used for this list.

I know next to nothing about the server that the list is currently
hosted at.  Where do you get the information that you're basing this
comparison on?

> PS: I sent two test mails one after another to one of mailing lists
> (to test the encoding) and received them already but I still have
> not received my first mail to the Unicode list. But I guess this
> half-an-hour delay has to do with the server change, isn't it?

It seems to be a bit slow currently, I'll give you that much.

-- 
Gaute Strokkeneshttp://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
If I felt any more SOPHISTICATED I would DIE of EMBARRASSMENT!

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mike Lischke]

Hi Christopher,

> To my mind the Unicode web & ftp servers mean that a separate file area just
> for this mailing list would be pretty well redundant - and I suspect most
> people subscribed to this list have much better things to do than to
> participate in chat rooms and polls (and I can't see what benefit they'd be). 

Yes, yes and yes. These were only examples, not meant as convincing arguments. 
Although I have a very bad stand with my complains about the technical side of this 
mailing list, I still have the hope to get some support by other subscribers.

> Having managed a number of lists myself in the past, I find it's usually
> more work and more time consuming to maintain a list through a web interface
> than it is to send command messages to a list server - and a lot of
> subscribers find the little advertisements Yahoo attaches to messages
> irritating. 

I agree with the ads-issue but you will get used with that little four-liner. Many 
people have a longer signature (also on this list). Managing through web or "command 
line" is a matter of taste and cannot be discussed.

> While Yahoo groups may have a powerful server and backbone the amount of
> traffic on that server and backbone means that it would not necessarily be
> any faster than the current set-up.   

Also agreed. I want to point out that their servers are at least as reliable as the 
one currently used for this list.

 
> BTW, out of curiosity, do you know if Yahoo Groups supports non-roman script
> messages? - If so, what character encodings & formats does it support? 

I have to admit I don't know. I have never cared about character encodings used with 
YG. Because of the Unicode list I have switched to UTF8 encoding for all my mails 
(sent in plain text) and they reach the receiver unaltered. Optionally you have HTML 
with all the well known character encodings if necessary (although I prefer plain text 
and be it only for security reasons).

Ciao, Mike

PS: I sent two test mails one after another to one of mailing lists (to test the 
encoding) and received them already but I still have not received my first mail to the 
Unicode list. But I guess this half-an-hour delay has to do with the server change, 
isn't it?

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mike Lischke]

> I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
> lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
> wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder of
> its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
> "X-list: unicode" .

Why don't you use the mailing list address as filter criterion? Works fine regardless 
of any subject
line.

Ciao, Mike

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[hiura]

> From: Gaute B Strokkenes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
> lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
> wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder of
> its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
> "X-list: unicode" .

You are right, this may not be very useful for whom wish to filter
their mail, but we better keep it in mind that this may be very useful
for whom do not/can not filter their mail.  Those whom can filter
their mail also can alter the subject line easily with, for example, 
small perl script.

So I support current setup done by Sarasvati.

--
hiura@{sun.com,li18nux.org,kondara.org,unicode.org} http://www.li18nux.org
Chair, Li18nux/Linux Internationalization Initiative, Free Standards Group
Architect/Sr. Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems, Inc, USA  FAX 650-786-9553

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Mike Lischke]

Hello Florian,

> Yahoo Groups has ads by default (unless you pay a monthly fee for list
> hosting), and some people do not trust the privacy policy of such
> organizations.  

Yes, I know. I'm subscribed to 9 YG mailing lists and manage another 4 on my own. It 
is a piece of cake and there is a lot of features which should satisfy most needs. 
Particularly every subscriber can decide whether to receive direct eMail (plain text 
or HTML), daily digest or web only (no mail). You can have alternative eMail addresses 
to post from without getting a message for every eMail (I need this because I have to 
post from two different mail accounts). In addition to the features I already 
mentioned you get statistics, a shared calender, a database (web based tables with 
templates for FAQs, phone books, Recipes list etc.) and a boomarks section for sharing 
interesting bookmarks.

>In addition, it doesn't look too well if you cannot
> run your own lists.  I mean, you can't imagine that the Unicode web
> site moves over to GeoCities, can you? ;-)

The web server of course not, but the mailing list? To be honest it doesn't look so 
good as it is now. For every reply I have to edit the receiver, there is no complete 
archive, I cannot post from every place I would like to etc. But this is all technical.

The competence of many subscribers here, however, is excellent and I much appreciate 
to be allowed to listen at all.

> An important part (and certainly the most time-consuming after the
> initial setup) is tracing bounces and removing bogus subscriptions.  I
> don't think Yahoo does this for you.

No, there are 4 main pages for managing members (every page is sortable by name or 
join date). One for general management, one for pending members (if approvement is 
required), one for bouncing members and one for banned members. Tonight I had three 
bouncing members in one of my lists. I managed them while I did the lookup to give 
correct information in this eMail.

It think nobody has time to waste, so why doing it voluntary?

Ciao, Mike

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Asmus Freytag]

At 05:53 PM 3/21/01 +0100, you wrote:
>I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
>lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
>wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder of
>its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
>"X-list: unicode" .

This is not supported on all mail clients.

I urge Sarasvati to stick with this setup.
A./

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dear Unicode subscribers:
> 
> This week Parvati and I will be moving the Unicode
> mail list to a new server with new mail software.
> I hope the move goes smoothly, but as you know
> the best laid plans of mice and machines cough and
> sputter in the wabe and so forth.  Please do not
> be alarmed if you see temporary glitches.  All
> current subscribers will be moved forward with
> default options.

I see that the list software now appends [unicode] to all subject
lines.  This is very annoying, and not very useful, since those who
wish to filter their mail and put posts from this list in a folder of
its own etc. etc. can now do so by using other headers, such as
"X-list: unicode" .

-- 
Gaute Strokkeneshttp://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
I feel like I'm in a Toilet Bowl with a thumbtack in my forehead!!

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Marco Cimarosti]

Personally, I don't like very much the new policy of adding the label
"[unicode]" in front of message subjects, for two reasons:

1) It is the same prefix used by the list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, to
which I subscribed for receiving daily digests of the Unicode List's
message. What I do is to periodically delete all messages from the Unicode
List, and keep only YahooGroup's digests archived. Of course I distinguish
the messages from the two mailing list by the prefix.

2) The label is added before the "RE: " label for replays. So when I replay
to a reply I get "RE: [unicode] RE: my subject" and I have to manually
remove "Re: [unicode] ". I guess that, if I don't do it, my reply will
arrive to other people like "[unicode] RE: [unicode] RE: my subject", and
when they reply to me it would become "RE: [unicode] RE: [unicode] RE: my
subject" etc.

_ Marco

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Christopher John Fynn]

Mike Lischke wrote

> Dear Sarasvati,

...
 
> Just out of curiosity, why do you use an own mailing list server if 
> you can use a free one (Yahoo Groups)? The Unicode list is mirrored 
> there anyway, so why not make the "backup list" being the actual 
> list. You will get not only the list, but also a shared file area, 
> chat, polls, an open archive and a powerful server/backbone. And you 
> will take the load of managing the list from your shoulders.
 
> Ciao, Mike

Mike

I'd rather keep Sarasvati. 

To my mind the Unicode web & ftp servers mean that a separate file area just for this 
mailing list would be pretty well redundant - and I suspect most people subscribed to 
this list have much better things to do than to participate in chat rooms and polls 
(and I can't see what benefit they'd be). 

Having managed a number of lists myself in the past, I find it's usually more work and 
more time consuming to maintain a list through a web interface than it is to send 
command messages to a list server - and a lot of subscribers find the little 
advertisements Yahoo attaches to messages irritating. 

While Yahoo groups may have a powerful server and backbone the amount of traffic on 
that server and backbone means that it would not necessarily be any faster than the 
current set-up.   

BTW, out of curiosity, do you know if Yahoo Groups supports non-roman script messages? 
- If so, what character encodings & formats does it support? 

- Chris   

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Florian Weimer]

Sarasvati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Dear Unicode subscribers:
> 
> This week Parvati and I will be moving the Unicode
> mail list to a new server with new mail software.

I'm sorry but you made a SEVERE configuration error: the envelope from
address of outgoing messages points back to the list itself, it MUST
point to an administrative account read by the list maintainer(s) so
that they can remove bogus subscriptions.  (There are list managers
which can automate this task to a certain degree.)  All other options
(original envelope from of the submitter, addresses from the message
header) are simply WRONG.

(That's the reason why we keep seeing these error messages from
microsoft.com, for example.)

[unicode] Re: Moving mail lists

[Florian Weimer]

"Mike Lischke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Just out of curiosity, why do you use an own mailing list server if
> you can use a free one (Yahoo Groups)?

Yahoo Groups has ads by default (unless you pay a monthly fee for list
hosting), and some people do not trust the privacy policy of such
organizations.  In addition, it doesn't look too well if you cannot
run your own lists.  I mean, you can't imagine that the Unicode web
site moves over to GeoCities, can you? ;-)

> And you will take the load of managing the list from your shoulders.

An important part (and certainly the most time-consuming after the
initial setup) is tracing bounces and removing bogus subscriptions.  I
don't think Yahoo does this for you.