From: Peter C. McCluskey (pcm@rahul.net)
Date: Tue Mar 20 2001 - 12:58:44 CST
jose.kahan@w3.org (jose.kahan@w3.org) writes:
>In our previous episode, Peter C. McCluskey said:
>>
>> My limited experience with wanting to find attachments suggests that
>> the index as currently implemented isn't easy to use. What I would
>> find useful is to add a list of attachment file names after each message.
>> Does anyone object to my making such sub-lists a standard feature of the
>> attachment lists?
>> --
>
>Could you give us a more visual statement of your proposition? It's hard
>to see what it would look like before you do it.
Here are two versions of what I have in mind (the additions being the
added <ul> or <ol> sections; I think I prefer the second version):
<li>Startup Kit file (DOC and RTF) <a name="54"><em>Bruce Smith</em></a> <em>(Fri Jan 12 2001 - 00:37:53 PST)</em>
<ul>
<li>01-StartUpKit.DOC
<li>02-StartupKit.rtf
</ul>
<li>Startup Kit file (DOC and RTF) <a name="54"><em>Bruce Smith</em></a> <em>(Fri Jan 12 2001 - 00:37:53 PST)</em>
<ol>
<li>StartUpKit.DOC (160256 bytes)
<li>StartupKit.rtf (112609 bytes)
</ol>
For messages whose attachments are all inlined, I would make no changes
(unless people encourage me to leave them out of the attachments index
entirely - I'm not sure why they are being listed).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter McCluskey | Fed up with democracy's problems? Examine Futarchy:
http://www.rahul.net/pcm | http://hanson.gmu.edu/futarchy.pdf or .ps