W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: [WAI-IG] list policies (top posting for vision impairments)

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:15:59 -0500
Message-ID: <00ba01c3fe72$5b306150$6401a8c0@handsontech>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Who said what?  I already knew what I said so waiding through it was a tile
killer.  I did say intellegently.  If the poster is clear enough in the top
post, the quoted portion of the message does not have to be read but then I
read new messages first.  Most people I know, read from oldest to newest.
Putting your reply to someone's comment at the top rightly assumes that the
post to which you are replying has already been seen.  Also, it provides
consistance.  I know that some times, it is necessary to interleave
responses into a message and I can live with that even though it is
difficult to deal with.  I have been working with top posting since 1992.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tina Holmboe" <tina@greytower.net>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [WAI-IG] list policies (top posting for vision impairments)

On 28 Feb, David Poehlman wrote:

> intelegently.  I've studied a lot of different methods of communicating,
> I've seen a lot of them and when email was yong, all we saw was top
> Anything else is scrambled eggs no matter how good you are at searching or
> scrolling.

  I have, previously, made my views on this topic very well know.
  However, I must take issue with this comment of yours.

  When e-mail was young, in its teens, and in its early adult years
  there were no top posting. This trend is recent even in Internet time.

  As for the advantage ... well. I see none. With your method I first
  read a reply, and THEN need to scroll down to try to figure out what
  exactly it was you replied to.

  With my method, as used here, each respons follows the issue it is
  responding to. It is simple, elegant, a de facto standard ever since
  e-mail was first used, and a logical way for people to work.

  However, I am not vision impaired. I find it hard to believe that any
  person with such difficulties would not use a mail client capable of
  understanding what *is* in effect a standard way of quoting.

  For a person with low or no vision to be forced to scroll up and down,
  up and down, up and down, to keep the current reply and what it
  relates to in focus must be sheer hell. I can't even begin to imagine
  being blind, reading a top-posted reply, and then have to remember
  that entire reply whilst I desperately wade through possibly several
  levels of content ...

  It makes my skin crawl, and would certainly lead me to very quickly
  dismiss e-mail as a viable means of communication. But that's just me.

 -    Tina Holmboe                    Greytower Technologies
   tina@greytower.net                http://www.greytower.net/
   [+46] 0708 557 905
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2004 22:16:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:27 UTC