[Fwd: Re: [unrev-II] Meeting Summary: 22 Aug '00]

From: Eric Armstrong (eric.armstrong@eng.sun.com)
Date: Thu Aug 24 2000 - 18:45:04 PDT

Since I made the mistake of posting the original note on unrev, I'm
this excellent post to ohs-dev, so I can reply to it there.

-------- Original Message --------
 Subject: Re: [unrev-II] Meeting Summary: 22 Aug '00
    Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:05:54 -0400
    From: Jack Park <jackpark@verticalnet.com>
Reply-To: unrev-II@egroups.com
      To: unrev-II@egroups.com

The paper "Beyond Threaded Discourse" by Jim Hewitt is available at:

Hewitt sheds some interesting light on some of the points Eric makes

From: Eric Armstrong <eric.armstrong@eng.sun.com>

> --What I want, fundamentally, is an email system that delivers
> a reply to me "in context" so that it appears as part of
> the original message. I would also like to be able to register
> the threads I'm interested in -- always seeing threads that are
> really new, but not being bothered with additional messages
> to old threads that I've already chosen to ignore. The current
> proposal won't give me anything like that, but will instead
> clutter my inbox with link-containing messages. Reconstructing
> an argument from a series of messages like that will be
> next to impossible. That will force me to consult the archive.
> --Unlike many users, apparently, I am not a big fan of archives.
> In fact, I hate them. I have my own archives -- copies of the
> messages I care about. I search them when I need to. So a
> system in which the archive is the most (and possibly only)
> useful part of the system holds little interest for me.
> --The other email problem that I would love to see fixed
> is not addressed by this proposal: searches. When I search
> messages in my inbox, I get a list of messages -- I then
> have to click each message to open the text, and do another
> search to find the term! Awful. Search should work like a
> document search (find next, always showing the term in
> context).
> Bottom line:
> Had we done the use case analysis, I would like to think that
> system requirements like "see reply in context", "ability to
> ignore threads" and "better searches" would have come out. For
> the use cases we did examine, the need for categories did appear,
> but is not addressed in reasonable fashion in this proposal, imo.


This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may
contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not
the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication is
If you have received this communication in error, please erase all
of the message and its attachments and notify postmaster@verticalnet.com




Community email addresses:
  Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
  Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
  Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
  List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com

Shortcut URL to this page:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:57:52 PDT