| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, David Blewett <david(at)dawninglight(dot)net>, "pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: List Message Footer |
| Date: | 2009-03-18 03:54:32 |
| Message-ID: | 20090318035432.GR4202@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >> But, the question is: why? and not just to you, but Tom/Magnus/Alvarre
> >> ... I'm not advocating for, I'm just curious why ppl are against ...
>
> > Yea, I should have stated that. I think the footer is full enough and I
> > just don't see enough demand for URL lookups to warrant it.
>
> Same here. The information is already provided; we don't need to
> duplicate it in the footer. I'm not impressed by the argument that
> some folks' mail programs won't dig it out of the headers --- I think
> it's about as likely that they won't dig a URL out of a standard footer
> either.
The obvious difference is that headers are normally hidden as
uninteresting metadata, whereas footers are shown as normal body text.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-18 04:03:48 | Re: List Message Footer |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-18 03:40:14 | Re: List Message Footer |