Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-05 Thread Brad Knowles
At 4:58 PM +0900 2004-10-05, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: The rest of the time, it's trivial to format them as a pulldown or popup menu. You mean that you think they're going to understand or remember how to use a pulldown or popup menu? For the class of luser we

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-05 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
> "Brad" == Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Brad> Well, by default, it doesn't ignore or hide the List-* Brad> headers, and turns them into proper clickable links. [...] Brad> This is all that needs to be done to properly Brad> implement the RFC. If you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread John W. Baxter
On 10/4/2004 17:39, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 5:17 PM -0700 2004-10-04, John W. Baxter wrote: > >> OK, so what does Eudora do to make the RFC 2919 headers useful? All I think >> it does out of the box is not filter any of them in its presentation of a >> message, leading

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread Brad Knowles
At 5:17 PM -0700 2004-10-04, John W. Baxter wrote: OK, so what does Eudora do to make the RFC 2919 headers useful? All I think it does out of the box is not filter any of them in its presentation of a message, leading to endless complaints about "those headers" and being the prime trigger for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread John W. Baxter
On 10/4/2004 14:04, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:24 AM -0700 2004-10-04, John W. Baxter wrote: > >> Now look at Qualcom's MUA products and their implementation of the RFC. >> This appears to be low priority, in that Eudora 5 and 6 have emerged since >> the RFC. > > Qualco

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread Brad Knowles
At 10:24 AM -0700 2004-10-04, John W. Baxter wrote: Now look at Qualcom's MUA products and their implementation of the RFC. This appears to be low priority, in that Eudora 5 and 6 have emerged since the RFC. Qualcomm does just fine in this respect. Qualcomm is not the problem. Microsoft is t

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread John W. Baxter
On 10/4/2004 1:16, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The only disadvantage to this approach is that it requires cooperation > from the large MUA vendors like Microsoft and Qualcomm, and the users > know they're far more likely to get sympathy and timely action, at no > cost in mon

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-10-04 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
> "demo" == demo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: demo> I am not a coder and so cannot help I am afraid but may be demo> an upgrade would be to autogenerate an email with a series demo> of clickable links that generate emails that work with the demo> given addresses. demo> ...

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-09-25 Thread Mark Sapiro
Mark Sapiro wrote: > >One reason these are templates is to enable site specific changes to >meet site needs. You can edit these templates and a future update will >not overlay your changes. > Clarification: The last sentence above applies if you are upgrading from source. I have no idea what will

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-09-25 Thread Mark Sapiro
demo wrote: > >Just some humble feedback on the response message; > >This is one area where I find users fall over and die and the complexity of >the response and don't know what to do. [ And it is usually normal users >that are trying to use it to unsubscribe ]. It is very techie. > >Little things

Re: [Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-09-25 Thread Brad Knowles
At 12:27 PM +0100 2004-09-25, demo wrote: I am not a coder and so cannot help I am afraid but may be an upgrade would be to autogenerate an email with a series of clickable links that generate emails that work with the given addresses. Mailman is an open source project, and we would welcome any

[Mailman-Users] Email command upgrade

2004-09-25 Thread demo
Hi Just some humble feedback on the response message; This is one area where I find users fall over and die and the complexity of the response and don't know what to do. [ And it is usually normal users that are trying to use it to unsubscribe ]. It is very techie. Little things might help, like