Re: next unread mesage, newest or oldest?

On Saturday 10 April 2010, Dj YB wrote:
> On Saturday April 10 2010 17:42:29 Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > On Saturday 10 April 2010, Dj YB wrote:
> > > hello,
> > > it seems like "next unread message" is looking for the next
> > > unread message from top to bottom of the mails list.
> > > however the mails are not necessarily ordered by ascending date
> > > from top to bottom therefore we don't get the next unread
> > > message as in the first to arrive that we didn't read... (I hope
> > > that wasn't too confusing).
> > > the problem arises for me in the inbox folder where the newest
> > > messages are in the top and "next unread.." is starting from the
> > > top resulting in reading the new mails before the old ones.
> > 
> > Hmm, if you use threading then I don't understand where the problem
> > is. With threading the messages in the thread are sorted "older
> > messages first" so that "next unread message" does exactly the
> > right thing.
> 
> in the mailing-lists folders where I use the threading there is no
> problem only in the folders that are not for threads like the
> "inbox".

Okay. But then your suggestion to look at the thread date makes no sense 
to me. If the messages are not threaded then there is no thread date.


> > Or is the problem that newer threads are read before older threads?
> > Is this really a problem? Usually, different threads are unrelated
> > so it shouldn't really matter in which order you read them.
> 
> that is not a problem for me.
> 
> > > I think a way to "fix" (as I am not sure what was the original
> > > goal) this is to look by thread date (if there is such a
> > > thing)...
> > 
> > I don't think making "next unread message" jump seemingly randomly
> > from message to message would be very user friendly.
> 
> it shouldn't be random the messages are ordered (when not threaded)
> by date only descending and not ascending.

So you suggest that "next unread message" should move upwards when the 
messages are sorted newest first? I think this is almost a philosophical 
question. Does "next" mean "next in time" or "next in place"? Should 
"next" always move up if the sort order is descending and move down if 
the sort order is ascending (i.e. also if one sorts by subject)?

I don't think that making the meaning of "next" depend on the sort order 
is a good idea.


Regards,
Ingo

_______________________________________________
KDE PIM users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kdepim-users

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkvAvmYACgkQGnR+RTDgudgKjgCgzgaBuk/vebFZ6S9h0cJjT6JF
Ll0An1mPVuwOg1SzPIHp0gnwzO7Z+XUD
=2Jlk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----