From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4707
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen)
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: More trees
Date: 16 Jan 1996 00:17:27 +0100
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
Sender: larsi@ifi.uio.no
Message-ID: <w8s4ttx3v5k.fsf@gymir.ifi.uio.no>
References: <91jg2vln.fsf@bjob.no> <199601121121.LAA22145@ftel.ftel.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145417 30541 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:23:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:23:37 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA14676 for <steve@miranova.com>; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 15:53:32 -0800
Original-Received: from gymir.ifi.uio.no (4867@gymir.ifi.uio.no [129.240.80.2]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <AAA00489@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:17:28 +0100
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by gymir.ifi.uio.no ; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:17:28 +0100
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
In-Reply-To: Ian Fitchet's message of Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:21:16 +0000
Original-Lines: 29
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4707
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4707

Ian Fitchet <I.D.Fitchet@ftel.co.uk> writes:

> >And here's the new one:
> 
> >{***}
>    |--------------------------\-----\-----\
> >(***)                         [Bjo] [Gun] [Gun]
>    |--\-----\-----\                          |
> >[odd] [Jan] [odd] (***)                   [Jor]
>    |           |     |--\
> >[Gun]       [Eri] [Eri] [odd]
>                            |
>                          [Paa]

[...]

>  If you read top-down left-right (we may want this configurable for
> those reading/learning Chinese and the like) I would expect the tree
> to grow from top to bottom -- this bit is OK.  As I read from left to
> right, I would expect to find the eldest article on the left, the
> newest on the right

This version of the tree shows generations when read from the top and
down.  The other version shows (as you suggest) generations when read
from left to right.  Doing bottom-up and right-left versions would
simply entail reversing the buffer.  Sort of.  

-- 
Home is where the cat is.