On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 09:37:43PM +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 08 2014, W. Trevor King wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 08:29:41PM +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote:
> >> On Sat, Feb 08 2014, W. Trevor King wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 09:54:28AM -0400, David Bremner wrote:
> >> >> More importantly some of the threads are run together: e.g. 
> >> >> 
> >> >> id:"4eddf2b1.4288980a.0b74.5557@mx.google.com" and
> >> >> id:"E1RYMYd-0003wu-Ea@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de"
> >> >
> >> > Both of those messages are part of the same thread
> >> > (thread:000000000000eaab on my box, but I doubt thread IDs are
> >> > portable), so I don't add a thread-separating space between them.
> >> > Would you like more message-separating space even between messages
> >> > in the same thread?
> >> 
> >> …
> >> 
> >> I think the more space does not fix anything but it might help
> >> regognizing message boundaries a bit (and thus would be a nice
> >> feature).
> >
> > Added to my example and nmbug-status-python3 branch.  I'm using CSS
> > for this new spacing, so non-CSS browsers (e.g. w3m) won't render the
> > inter-message spacing.  I think the colored-link (second message row)
> > vs. default id (first message row) makes inter-message separation
> > clear enough in that case.
> 
> The 2 0.5em:s adds up to 1em between messages and that IMHO makes the
> messages be too far apart from each other. I changed the padding-top
> and padding-bottom values to 0.25em which IMHO is better...

0.25em works for me.  Branch and example updated.

Cheers,
Trevor

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy