Succession/chronological order is wrong/confusing in Threaded view (but good in List view)

[Graham Perrin]

Good:


— an origin, followed by successors.

Confusing:


— at one extreme (the top): an origin
— at the other extreme: the first successor
— in the midst: other successors

[Hugo <Nabble>]

Hi Graham,

The Threaded view is a tree whose branches are sorted in reverse chronological order. So branches with recent posts are displayed on top and old branches are displayed at the bottom. This sorting helps users find what is new in the thread.

Regards,
Hugo Teixeira
Nabble.com

[Graham Perrin]

I guessed that answer, but wished to have it confirmed.

(Does no-one argue for *List* view to be reversed?
Does reversing in the List context not help users to find what's new in the thread?
If reversal is not helpful in lists, then how does reversal become helpful in threads?
I'm sure that there are valuable UI answers to these questions but the point is,
one solution does not fit all ;)

For some users, probably not me alone, reversal is *highly* contrary to what's found in other threaded environments. I'm most familiar with threading in Apple Mail.app. YMMV and appreciate that mine do.

Please, when things are less busy, can you add an option:

[Classic | List | Threaded | Threaded and reversed ]

That wording is provocative but you get the idea.

Graceful use of icons (a Nabble forté), probably one for each of the two threaded options, should do the trick.

Many thanks
Graham

[Graham Perrin]

Graham Perrin wrote

add an option

To clarify:

* the option should be presented to the user

* additionally, you might allow the manager of a forum to pre-set normal or reversed for threads, but that's less important.

(As the user has such easy control over UI and sorting, so the manager enjoys little or no worry about defaults.)

[Graham Perrin]

1) The earlier example (relatively short and shallow):
<http://n2.nabble.com/new-user-tt1679910.html#none>

2) A more recent example (deeper and more numerous staggers):
<http://n2.nabble.com/New-on-the-wiki%21-tt2244998.html#none>

Example (1) remains, to me, clearly out of order:
19, 22, 20, 22, 20, 20, 20

Example (2) appears, at the time of writing, more orderly, but I think it's because I mis-read 12-hour clock as 24-hour clock.

In the PNG and PDF attached, I read 08:17 (earlier) neatly above 12:08 (most recent).


threaded.pdf

Then, I look more closely, I see am against both times but still I'm confused, because I *never* think of the hour after midnight as past twelve; I think (and speak) eight minutes past midnight.

So: I visit <http://n2.nabble.com/user/Advanced.jtp> and prefer 24 hour clock.

Now I'm less confused by the times but as the times become clear, so  
<http://n2.nabble.com/New-on-the-wiki%21-tt2244998.html#none> appears more disorderly.

— 

Incidentally this plea for an option to sort threads in  chronological order not reversed is logically separate from RFE: post-subscription sorting of the list of subscriptions.

I suspect that some of this boils down to the never-to-be-aligned diverse approaches to reply-at-top (echoes of Microsoft e-mail clients) and reply-at-foot, or interspersed. I'm a die-hard foot/intersperse person.

[Graham Perrin]

I do love threaded view for its threadedness.

However, it's really difficult to find the timeline in some threaded topics (example).

It should not be so difficult.

[Franklin <Nabble>]

I understand why you want this.  We will do it when a few more users ask for it.

[Graham Perrin]

Fair enough, thanks.

It's probably my dyslexia (which doesn't show in spelling) that makes me more conscious of this than some other users.

[Graham Perrin]

Another example of threaded view not bringing enough sense, I have to look two or three times (or switch out of threaded view) to make sense, to find a most recent post:



Whether this particular example could be resolved by offering a truer order for the branches of the tree, I don't know. To be honest it leaves me a bit dizzy/confused!