On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 11:59:38PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Though it's worth pointing out that the terms "interleaved, inline, > conversation, etc." are relatively new - reflecting, perhaps, a > longer-standing practice. I can remember religious arguments about > top vs. bottom posting back to ARPANET and USENET days. This is > actually the first time I've see the more nuanced "interleaved" > style explicitly identified in one of these threads.
Exactly. Consider this post, is it interleaved, or bottom style? So if you are responding to just one point then, of course, it is bottom style but it is *also* conversation style. If there were two points being responded to then the distinction becomes more clear. I also believe that the waters were muddied by people discussing (me included) "trimming", all in the same sentence/paragraph. So in a "one off mail" there is no real difference between bottom posting and interleaved/inline style. Generally, in mailing lists, posts are not one off and therefore the difference becomes more noticeable. I believe it is self evident which posts are easier to read especially when you bring trimming into the picture. -- "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." -- Napoleon Bonaparte -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408131111.GE28264@tal
