Re: Maybe this is old news but...

[Danilo Turina <danilo dot turina at alcatel dot it>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> ...I just saw this:
>
> http://learn.to/quote/
>
> IMO, the use of the "to" domain is cute and the web page itself is
> nicely done.
>
> cgf

Nice page, thank you.

Anyway, IMHO, writing after the quote is not always the best way to go.
That is, it's the best way to go if the reader is reading only the last 
mail of the thread and wants to know all the context of the discussion, 
but if one, as I usually do, reads a thread starting from the first 
post, it's a bit awful, since you have something like this:


Post #1
-------

bla bla bla bla Cygwin bla bla bash bla bla thread bla bla.
Posix bla bla, Windows API, bla bla bla.
bla bla compliant bla bla.
bla bla bla.


Post #2
-------

> bla bla bla bla Cygwin bla bla bash bla bla thread bla bla.
> Posix bla bla, Windows API, bla bla bla.
> bla bla compliant bla bla.
> bla bla bla.

Not alwasy true, since bla bla bla bla.
bla bla bla bla bla bla.
bla bla bla bla bla bla.


Post #3
-------

> > bla bla bla bla Cygwin bla bla bash bla bla thread bla bla.
> > Posix bla bla, Windows API, bla bla bla.
> > bla bla compliant bla bla.
> > bla bla bla.
>
> Not alwasy true, since bla bla bla bla.
> bla bla bla bla bla bla.
> bla bla bla bla bla bla.

Of course, but consider the case when bla bla bla bla bla
bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla.
Please attach cygcheck output bla bla bla.



When you read a post that is around level 5/6 you must skip a lot of 
text that you have already read in the previous posts and, of course, 
the text you are interested in (i.e. the reply of the sender of the 
post) is not immediately visibile when you open the post (you must 
scroll down and skip the above text before reaching it).

Ciao,

		Danilo