Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize?? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
From | Sandman |
Date | 04/30/2014 09:35 (04/30/2014 09:35) |
Message-ID | <slrnlm1a3t.gm8.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Eric Stevens |
You're the one who said that Agent showed a post that is clearly part of an ongoing thread, given the existence of sequence information in its header - as a "new" thread.Eric StevensSandman
I have several times asked you to refer me to an RFC or similar which defines what is and what isn't a thread. Don't again point me to section 3.4.4 of RFC 3577 as it does nothing of the sort.
That's 5537, and actually it does. It defines the structure of the References header, which is what you refer to as the "sequencing". There is NO sequencing using the Subject header, only via the References header.But this RFC says nothing about how a client should *display* articles, because "threading" has nothing to do with display. It's only information in the headers about which post and OP the post is in relation to. The client can choose to display the articles any damn way it pleases.Eric Stevens
Then why do you insist in arguing that Agent is 'broken' or 'non-standard' when it enables me to do just that?
How on EARTH does a screenshot of Agent "threaten" my position, Eric?Eric StevensI hope working out how it handles the threading is not beyond you.Sandman
Yeah, it's a total mess.
Yet again you have failed to look at an item which might threaten your position.
Time for >PLONK< I think.Oh, I wish, then I would get rid of your misinformation and idiocy.