Re: <draft-ietf-usefor-usepro-01.txt>

John Stanley <stanley <at> peak.org> wrote:
> "Charles Lindsey" <chl <at> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>>No, the poster cannot "define" how articles are to be displayed, but he
>>can indicate his intention in the matter ...
>
> If he cannot control it, his intention of controlling it is
> irrelevant.

Not to me, as a reader.  While I don't _have to_ display anything the
way the poster wants, I will often _choose_ to _defer to_ the poster's
wishes.

> "I want ...". That's nice, but you don't get to say. Presenting it
> as if there was some mechanism, when none exists, just leads to
> foolish expectations.

An expectation that is fulfilled, say, 98% of the time is far from
"foolish".

>>If you read the definition, some followups come from precursors and some
>>come from the poster's display intentions.
>
> Since the "display intentions" are irrelevant, that part of the 
> definition is irrelevant.

The "display intentions" are not irrelevant to me, as a reader,
because my newsreader adheres to them 99.9+% of the time (that is, I
seldom bother to override its defaults).

Seth