From: | Steve Wampler <swampler(at)noao(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Postgres-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Syntax error in a large COPY |
Date: | 2007-11-07 17:42:06 |
Message-ID: | 4731F8EE.6050800@noao.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Collin Kidder wrote:
> I'm with Thomas. I think that, while inline posting is a good thing,
> bottom posting is dead stupid and wastes my time. It is far easier to
> follow a thread with top posting as the relevant text is right there at
> the top ready to be read.
That sounds more like an argument to not including the original text at all.
As far as I'm concerned, in-line posting *with* editing of the text is
the *only* reasonable thing to do. Top-posting is lazy, arrogant, and assumes
reading material on a recently read thread (so the context is fresh). It
offers no advantages when reading a posting after-the-fact or taken in
isolation. The reader has to first re-establish the context, which means
reading the message from the bottom up.
Bottom posting (w/o editing) is only *slightly* less lazy, but doesn't
make the assumption that the reader is current on the context, at least.
Bottom posting w/o editing forces the reader to wade through old material
that isn't relevant, however, to reestablish the context.
The argument based on being able to link back up through a thread to
get context is a non-sequitur. If one really believes that's the case,
then don't include the original text *at all* (whether top or bottom
posting) [and see how many people complain about lack of context!]
If there is some context that is relevant to what's being
added, seeing *just that context* immediately prior to reading the new material
is invaluable.
[This *isn't* a bottom-posted message - it just looks like one because
of the context editing!]
--
Steve Wampler -- swampler(at)noao(dot)edu
The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bill Moran | 2007-11-07 17:53:20 | Re: DB on a ramdisk (was Re: Temporary, In-memory Postgres DB?) |
Previous Message | Andrej Ricnik-Bay | 2007-11-07 17:35:55 | Re: Syntax error in a large COPY |