- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:34:53 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Top posting is the most intelegent way to go but it must be done intelegently. I've studied a lot of different methods of communicating, and I've seen a lot of them and when email was yong, all we saw was top posting. Anything else is scrambled eggs no matter how good you are at searching or scrolling. The advantages to top posting are that you will usually already know what is in the previous message and if not, you can read the response first or skip down to the original post. Imagine if we did this backwards and the newest bits were burried won below several previous osts. Interleaving stuff is sort of ok, but jumping through the hoops that must be jumpped through in order to pick out the new bits after you have already read the old bits can be tricky and often, there is a lot of message with no comment that you have to wade through and often, that is at the end of the message so a lot of time gets waisted that way. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Craig" <wai-ig@cookiecrook.com> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:53 PM Subject: [WAI-IG] list policies (top posting for vision impairments) A discussion on the WebDesign-L list got me thinking about list policies on accessibility-related lists. On general lists "top posting" is generally discouraged, however I've heard that it's beneficial for people with vision impairments. To clarify, top posting is responding to a post above or before the quoted post or question. [Start example] I think that XYZ is the best solution for FOO. John Doe wrote: > ABC is the best solution for FOO. [End example] What are the opinions on top posting from this list's vision-impaired subscribers? Thanks, James Craig -- http://cookiecrook.com/
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2004 21:34:58 UTC