Quoting for Thread Breaking Digest Replies . . . . . . . . . . (Re: [tlug] Re: font encoding question)

[Jim <jep200404@example.com>]

Josh wrote: 

> On 22/06/07, [Ken] <burlingk@example.com> wrote:
> 
> [snip four lines of unnecessary stuff]
> > > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [tlug] Re: font encoding question
> > > To: Tokyo Linux Users Group <tlug@example.com>
> [snip ten lines of unnecessary stuff]

> Ken, will you please trim just a tad more aggressively?

Actually, the "Subject:" and "To:" line could also be removed 
since their information is redundant, especially since Ken 
seems good at getting copying the subject from the digest body 
back for the real header where it belongs. 

Since replies to digests breaks threads, it's important to 
preserve the full date and/or message ID for them. E.g.,

   > Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:43:13 +0900
   ...
   > Message-ID: <87d4zp6c5a.fsf@example.com>

Better yet, would be to craft a conventional attribution, 
instead of quoting what used to be headers. Again, it's 
important to include the _full_ "Date:" and/or "Message-ID:" 
information, preferably both. E.g., 

   On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:43:13 +0900, 
   "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com> wrote 
   in <87d4zp6c5a.fsf@example.com>: 

Since Ken has been good about copying the subject back up for 
the read header, he's probably up for the tedium of this too, 
especially since it can help him get better answers, 
by making it easier for respondents to follow the conversation. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

In my own replies to thread breaking digest replies, I wish I had 
restored the thread by adding the appropriate message IDs to the 
"References:" header line. I'll start now. My email program will 
not understand the (re)spliced thread, but the archive has seemed 
particularly adept at darning otherwise unraveled threads. 

We'll see. 

Jim