W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2013

Re: SVG fonts: [ was RE: minutes, SVG WG TPAC F2F 2014, day 2]

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:39:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAuvY4NbYhy5L8yaHcLpLsbrP27Z8ss+cNfd4n0r-R=ig@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
Cc: Jelle Mulder <pjmulder@xs4all.nl>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:32 PM, David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net> wrote:
> Why? This particular form of internet etiquette is new to me, but I've just entered my 40th year of using the Internet.
> Not saying you don't have a reason, it is just not a custom I've encountered before. Or perhaps I encountered it before but just never heard anyone express a social more that would govern it.

It's very common in mailing lists, to the point of being explicitly
mentioned in multiple standards-group FAQs, such as
for the WHATWG and <http://wiki.csswg.org/tools/www-style> for the

Many Usenet groups I used to browse had an explicit policy about this, too.

There's even a 1995 RFC about it: <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855>

> If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
> summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
> enough text of the original to give a context.  This will make
> sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
> Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
> postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
> response to a message before seeing the original.  Giving context
> helps everyone.  But do not include the entire original!

Wikipedia also has a good summary of stylistic concerns related to
mailing lists, and their history:

Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 21:40:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:47 UTC