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 23:54:32 -0500
Message-ID: <002f01c3fe80$cabdc810$6401a8c0@handsontech>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

In This instance, since the posting format is so choppy, I will follow its
example and cut and insert.  My inserts will be in the form: [dp] and I do
not use the > sign.  These questions deserve answers.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Derek Featherstone" <feather@wats.ca>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 11:30 PM
Subject: RE: [WAI-IG] list policies (top posting for vision impairments)

> 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

Can you define "clear enough"? For whom? In what context? When? Right now as
we read these posts, two Mondays from now when Susan gets back from
vacation? Three months from now when someone searches for "benefits of
top-posting" via Google and ends up in this discussion on the web based
archive?
{\[dp] The separation from one to another is clear.  the information
provided as answer or reply contains information from what it is a reply too
so that it is clear enough.  This is the same as saying that using quoted or
bottom posting is clear.  I think they both have their draw backs or should
I say all three have their drawbacks.

> 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.

OK -- now we are getting somewhere. I'm genuinely trying to understand your
point of view here David, because we obviously disagree on the issue. What
is it about it that makes it difficult to deal with?

[dp] It takes a lot of searching for me.  I have to go through a message to
which I am replying and edit it and or put some shecial characters in it so
that I am identified with the comments I am making.  When time is at issue,
it takes a lot less of it to top post even in an intelligent way than to cut
a message up or cut out a bit of a message to reply to and make sure I
haven't started writing in the middle of the message.  I wouldn't call this
a disagreement but certainly a difference in approach.

> I have been working with top posting since 1992.

I've been working with email just as long, and from the beginning, its
always been the other way around. How or why did you first start with top
posting? Was it something that just happened? Based on research? Conventions
of the communities you were communicating with? Again, I'm very curious, and
serious about the question. My habits of not top-posting comes from Usenet,
and Usenet convention is quote and respond. Doing the same for email only
seemed natural to me.
[dp] I explored other methods and as is the case with this method, I use
them from time to time.  Top posting has become the easiest and simplest for
me and a lot of the messages I see have this format.  Straying from top
posting for me usually takes place if I am having a one on one conversation
with someone rather than on a list mostly because the messages take a more
conversational form.  The bottom line here though is that it is only email
or is it emale, my synth cannot tell the difference and if something is sent
in a different format than that which I would send in, I just live with it.
The discussion though was about what might be the best way to post.  I can
see all sides of this, I can also see something else and that is that not
all people have to learn the most efficient ways of doing things because
their lives are not impacted as much by less efficient ways than others.

Best regards,
Derek.
--
Derek Featherstone  feather@wats.ca
Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca
Web Accessibility Testing and Services
http://www.wats.ca   1.866.932.4878 (North America)
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2004 23:59:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:31 UTC