h a l f b a k e r yClearly this is a metaphor for something.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
A buddy of mine works in an office, so his
main source of entertainment is derived
from sending me jokes and humorous/
pornographic media. I'd appreciate it if he
would be able to connect all these e-mails
together for easier management on my
part. Also, it would be nice to spread an
attachment
across several e-mails daisy-
chaned in this manner, so that a large file
could be uploaded, sent, and downloaded
in small portions.
RFC 2046: 5.2.2 Partial Subtype
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2046.txt
Defines "message/partial", the MIME type you'd use to transmit a large message that your client has broken into multiple parts. I don't know anyone who actually does that, though. [jutta, Jan 28 2006]
Gmail: How to create filters
http://mail.google....wer=6579&topic=1539
Not quite the ideal solution, but a quick fix to a specific problem. [jutta, Jan 29 2006]
[link]
|
| |
Your email client doesn't let you group messages by sender or thread? |
|
| |
About fifteen years ago, people used to regularly send large documents as parts. There were, and may still be, USENET newsgroups to which binary data was posted broken into multiple "shell archives" or "shar files", and there were programs that would automatically reconstitute and locally archive the contained documents. |
|
| |
But in the last couple of years, bandwidth has gone up to really not have this be necessary, and the number of users has gone up to make it harder and harder to have everybody do complicated things to their messages. I doubt it would catch on now. |
|
| |
Oh. That sucks. I wanted to e-mail
movies and short films and whatnot. |
|
| |
Gmail does sort into threads, but not by
sender. |
|
| |
Hm, gmail. Gmail. Gmail lets you create filters that automatically file and label incoming messages. While that's a little bit cumbersome, it will at least keep your humornographic friend out of your toplevel inbox, if you so desire. |
|
| |
You're right about the movies - sending those is a royal pain in the ass. Maybe there's room for a new transport protocol to evolve that solves that (and knows about thumbnails, scene indices, and media conversion). |
|
| |
Gmail is a web client, isn't it? It should be possible to set up something to handle thumbnails et al without a new protocol for something like Gmail. Maybe less true for run of the mill web mail clients that might not download any more than headers, though. |
|
| |
It would be a whole lot more sensible if
people just emailed links to the movie
or whatever on a web server
somewhere. That way your decision to
not go and view it represents a saving
in bandwidth. |
|
| |
I was worried that this was going to be a new kind of chain mail. But you can do this very easily with GMail and labels. |
|
| |
When I say movies, I mean my own. |
|
| |
I think hippo understood that. |
|
| |
The movie world could work like the image world works.
When I want to show photos to my friends these days, I don't email them; I just upload the media files to my flickr.com account (and there are many similar image gallery systems). Then either the people interested in seeing my pictures see them because they've socially connected themselves to me; or I can email URLs that point to the pictures to other people. |
|
| |
Doing this manually is the first stage; for a second stage, if everybody did this a lot, you might see clients - on cell phones, e.g. - that automatically post the document to a site (maybe one maintained by the cell provider) and send out links to that site. So the seamless combination of posting to a site and e-mailing a URL would become what you mean when you say "I'll e-mail you the movie". |
|
| |
Sounds like mime type message/partial. STFW |
|
| |
To head off the inevitable question, STFW = "Search The Fucking Web". (Which, interestingly, makes this a message that cannot be understood by those who need to heed it. Is there a name for that?)
And how do the *cool* people abbreviate "that's been the first link on this idea for a while - didn't you notice"? |
|
| |
Hey jutta, I thought you had a one annotation per idea policy or something. Are you really taken with this idea, bored, or do all my ideas just suck? |
|
| |