1 |
Graham Murray wrote: |
2 |
> Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> writes: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> There are many devices and webmail services that do quoting in the |
6 |
>> "Microsoft Outlook" style -- putting a one-line divider between the |
7 |
>> reply and the original message. No indentation or nesting of replies. |
8 |
>> This makes it harder to reply to specific parts of e-mails, but does |
9 |
>> show you the entire conversation unaltered (when everyone uses |
10 |
>> Outlook, anyway) -- and some companies actually /require/ that style |
11 |
>> of quoting, believe it or not. |
12 |
>> |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Maybe because it follows more closely (one of) the standard ways of |
15 |
> filing correspondence - maintaining a paper file by adding each new |
16 |
> document on top on top of the 'pile'. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> |
19 |
> |
20 |
|
21 |
So that's why when I need to know the history of a conversation that I |
22 |
have to flip that pile of papers over and start from the bottom. I |
23 |
always wondered why that was. It made more work then, it still does. |
24 |
|
25 |
Makes perfect sense. |
26 |
|
27 |
Dale |
28 |
|
29 |
:-) :-) |