[thesite] Tip Harvester question (was: [***] Formatting tips )

[aardvark]

> From: "Seth Bienek" <seth at sethbienek.com>
> 
> The flexibility of being able to parse tips within tips is useful, but
> are we willing to assume the performance hit of recursive parsing? 

ugh... as long as you aren't storing them nested in any way...

> Also, tip tags should not be nested IMO because each tip is it's own
> simple entity, and keping track of nested tips' relationships seems
> like it would be a nightmare, unless the idea is to store them
> independent of their parent(s) or child(ren), in which case, is the
> parent tag incomplete without the tip that was contained inside it? Or
> is the 'child' tip left in the original tip and stored redundantly as
> it's own tip as well?  I am open to discussion on this because it's a
> possibility that I'm overlooking some of the usefulness of this
> feature.

no nesting... that's just... well... absurd...

> Parsing only text before "-----Original Message-----" could keep good
> tips from being stored, depending on the method people use to reply. 
> Also, I think that Outlook is the mail prog of choice for only a small
> percentage of our members (unfortunately), so I would question whether
> this feature is worth the processing overhead for the additional
> messages.  Again, I could be talked out of these assumptions. 
> Sometimes thinking "outside the box" is a challenge for me.

even when i used outlook for list mail, i *always* trimmed the 
'original message' crap... that's what '>' are for... too bad not 
everybody uses those... we need a primer on email again, and we 
need to kill apps like Groupwise... anyway, no, there is no generic 
standard we could use...

> Do I get points for using the obnoxious cliche?

15?