Re: Re: [MathGroup]: Descriptive headings

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg52009] Re: [mg51985] Re: [mg51935] [MathGroup]: Descriptive headings*From*: DrBob <drbob at bigfoot.com>*Date*: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 01:03:25 -0500 (EST)*References*: <200411060707.CAA26011@smc.vnet.net>*Reply-to*: drbob at bigfoot.com*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

At the Google archive, at least, changing the subject disconnects a message from the thread, starting a new one. Often I go there to find things, and it's inconvenient when this kind of thing has occurred. Bobby On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 02:07:59 -0500 (EST), David Park <djmp at earthlink.net> wrote: > Paul, > > This is an idea that sounds nice in principle but is probably very difficult > in practice. It just imposes another test that a submission has to go > through before final posting. Whether the test is on the moderator or the > poster, it is just going to be an annoyance. Yes, it would be nice if > posters always used succinct perfectly descriptive headers but I would > rather things be open and easy than trying to shoehorn every posting into > some category. > > But this does raise the question: Does it help if repliers change the > headings to make them more descriptive and if so, to what extent should they > change them? > > David Park > djmp at earthlink.net > http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/ > > > > From: Paul Abbott [mailto:paul at physics.uwa.edu.au] To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net > To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net > > [I will be commenting on this in a post shortly - moderator] > > Hi all, and especially Steve Christensen: > > At the recent Wolfram Technology Conference in Champaign, Luc Barthelet > <lucb at ea.com>, a regular user of MathGroup suggested that it would be > good if all postings to MathGroup included a categorisation in their > header, e.g. > > Newbies, Graphics, Functions, Programming, Statistics, Teaching, > Integration, Numerics, Symbolic Algebra, Special Functions, ... > > so a Subject line might take the form > > [Statistics]: How to fit to an elliptical function? > > (not sure if the [ ] are required or useful). In this way, sorting by > Subject would be easier. Of course, it's not always easy to do such a > categorisation, and they may change with time (as a problem stated as a > Numerics might end up being solved using Symbolic Algebra). > Nevertheless, I think such a change would be very useful. It should also > help when doing searches on MathGroup archives. > > Cheers, > Paul > > -- > Paul Abbott Phone: +61 8 6488 2734 > School of Physics, M013 Fax: +61 8 6488 1014 > The University of Western Australia (CRICOS Provider No 00126G) > 35 Stirling Highway > Crawley WA 6009 mailto:paul at physics.uwa.edu.au > AUSTRALIA http://physics.uwa.edu.au/~paul > > > > > > -- DrBob at bigfoot.com www.eclecticdreams.net

**References**:**Re: [MathGroup]: Descriptive headings***From:*"David Park" <djmp@earthlink.net>