Sandman
In article <ihh0m9dibv94srt1n9kl96nkm1sa69loen@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

No need - I am questioning YOUR definition. And why can't you answer the question? It's simple enough.

Is a thread based on the subject or the References header?

Eric Stevens
To the reader, it is based primarily on the subject. After all, that's what they are there for.

Sandman
So all these news clients are showing a thread incorrectly:

Eric Stevens
It's not a question of incorrectly as there is no correct or wrong without a prior definition, which we don't seem to have.

Sandman
You *just* said:

"To the reader, it is based primarly on the subject".

That's you saying that the correct way is for the news client to thread posts by the subject, since that's supposedly how threading should be done "for the reader". Stop trying to weasel.

Eric Stevens
It's a question of whether or not it is convenient for the reader.

Sandman
No, "for the reader", it *IS* based. Not "it *MAY* be *convenient*".

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Eric Stevens
Then there is Agent which you ignored: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31088803/Agent%20Thread.jpg

Sandman
I didn't ignore it. I am showing how the standard way to display threads is done, and how Agent is non-standard.

Eric Stevens
It indicates threading although it is vulnerable to small children who muck around with the subject header. Threads are collapsed until although they can be expanded by clicking on the small shield icon to the left. I like it.

Sandman
I don't give a rats ass about what you like or don't like when it comes to news clients, Eric.

Because, if it is as you say, they will confuse the *hell* out of "the reader", since they by default think it's a completely new and frshly created thread.

Eric Stevens
When you have changed the subject, it is a new thread as far as the reader is concerned.

Sandman
You keep saying that, without support. Most readers have standard news clients that does NOT (I repeat - NOT) separate a post when the subject is changed, and honor the sequence of articles as stated in the headers. Your claim is based on "the reader" being only users of one of the worst news clients known to man - Agent.

In spite of containing quoted text. In spite of clearly having a "Re: " in the subject line.

Eric Stevens
You know better than that. Go read the RFC.

Sandman
Where in the RFC does it say that "To the reader, it is based primarily on the subject"`?

Remember, the RFC's have supported NOTHING of what you've said, and 100% of what I've said. You really shouldn't refer to them.

All these news clients, all wrong. Right?

Eric Stevens
People are wrong too, when it comes to choosing clothes.

Sandman
Hahahahahahahaa!!!!!!