Re: next unread mesage, newest or oldest?

On Saturday April 10 2010 21:07:33 Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> 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.

I tried to think of a solution to both threaded lists ad not threaded.
like if it is a thread then look at the thread date and if it is a regular 
message then look on the message 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 only think that next unread is the next first(oldest) unread 
message/(thread).
it just seems more natural to read messages in the order they arrived I think.

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

but it is right now, try sorting by sender or anything not the date then do a 
"next unread message" and watch the scrollbar and the dates, is it jumping 
according to the date or the position in the list?

Regards,
YB