Repeating topic title in each post..

[Dragosvr92]

On my forum i replaced the subject and author info with the post date. You could check the forum link in my profile.
It looks a lot better like this imo. Thanks PayBas. Maybe the devs can discuss about this topic between themselves and take a decision.

[keith10456]

@ Dragosvr - Nice... And even better on mobile

[Pony99CA]

I did a quick re-read of all of the posts in this topic and below is a summary of the arguments that were made.

In "Keep": for 1 see N, for 2 see M, 4 isn't true, for 6 see J, 7 wouldn't change if removed, 8 is a personal use case, and 9 is a "on the off chance"...


Reasons For Keeping

• 1 - It's always been there
  2 - Dev time spent removing it
  3 - It's conceivable that someone uses phpbb in a way that uses topic titles for organization
  4 - There may be search engine benefit
  5 - Semantic structure
  6 - Helps to track where the posts came from (moderation/members)
  7 - Want to link to a certain post in a topic
  8 - When opening individual subtopics in new tabs they have the title
  9 - Possibility of having 2 different titles and members can argue/search per title

Reasons For Removing

• A - Repeating same text over and over unnecessarily
  B - Enlarges database with unnecessary text
  C - Easier to read without the unnecessary text
  D - Other message boards removed it
  E - No search engine benefit
  F - Moderating posts more user friendly in general with it not being there
  G - Simplifies the posting display
  H - Moving a post won't suffer from "cut off" due to titles being too long (RE:)
  I - Doesn't read correctly when all post have one title then suddenly a completely different title when its about the same subject
  J - Doesn't help track where posts came from if subtitle was changed... Could also add "moved from" info to admin/moderator log
  K - Would still be able to link to individual posts
  L - Members hardly ever change the topic title
  M - Could simply remove from viewtopic_body and add work-around for merged topics
  N - Though it's always been there things change for the better, 3.1 is the time

Thanks for producing those lists. However, you didn't post any rebuttals for the Reasons for Removing like you did for Reasons for Keeping, so allow me.

• A - "Unnecessarily" is in the eyes of the user. Not all redundancy is "unnecessary" (our brains make use of redundancy in many cases.)
  B - Generally true, although you could set the post title to "" and have code that says If post_title = "" Then Display Topic Title. That would keep the database smaller (and fix people who cleared the post title just to make a point ).
  C - There's that subjective word "unnecessary" again. Personally I don't find it difficult to read now. Conduct a usability study and prove me wrong.
  D - All of them? Even if they had, though, so what? The phpBB team has often said that they don't do things just because other boards do.
  E - So what? Not everything has to benefit search engines. Now if you say that it hurts SEO (which I think that somebody did), that might be a valid point.
  F - How does it make moderating posts easier if the post title is gone?
  G - I don't believe that it simplifies post display in any truly significant way.
  H - True, but that truncation could be fixed by making the post title longer than the topic title.
  I - What does "correctly" mean? That seems subjective again. Plus, I gave an example where it provides some "threading" which I think helps readability, especially in long topics.
  J - True, but if you argue that very few people actually change the post title, then it still helps. You can't have it both ways.
  K - You could always link to posts before. You can't really "link by title" anyway (maybe the original post meant "reference", not link, but a true link is better anyway). So I agree that reason #7 is invalid.
  L - Maybe most users don't change post titles, but some do. Why remove a feature that some people are currently using?
  M - This doesn't really rebut point #2 at all. Telling how it could be done still requires developer time to implement it.
  N - Again with the subjective word "better". You're presuming that most people feel that the change would be for the better. Plenty of people here don't seem to agree.

So I think that most of those reasons are invalid, irrelevant or subjective. I don't think that there's enough objective evidence to remove the post title.

Again, given the disagreement, this should be an extension.

Steve

[hanakin]

Reasons For Keeping

• 1 - It's always been there
  2 - Dev time spent removing it
  3 - It's conceivable that someone uses phpbb in a way that uses topic titles for organization
  4 - There may be search engine benefit
  5 - Semantic structure
  6 - Helps to track where the posts came from (moderation/members)
  7 - Want to link to a certain post in a topic
  8 - When opening individual subtopics in new tabs they have the title
  9 - Possibility of having 2 different titles and members can argue/search per title

Reasons For Removing

• A - Repeating same text over and over unnecessarily
  B - Enlarges database with unnecessary text
  C - Easier to read without the unnecessary text
  D - Other message boards removed it
  E - No search engine benefit
  F - Moderating posts more user friendly in general with it not being there
  G - Simplifies the posting display
  H - Moving a post won't suffer from "cut off" due to titles being too long (RE:)
  I - Doesn't read correctly when all post have one title then suddenly a completely different title when its about the same subject
  J - Doesn't help track where posts came from if subtitle was changed... Could also add "moved from" info to admin/moderator log
  K - Would still be able to link to individual posts
  L - Members hardly ever change the topic title
  M - Could simply remove from viewtopic_body and add work-around for merged topics
  N - Though it's always been there things change for the better, 3.1 is the time

• A - "Unnecessarily" is in the eyes of the user. Not all redundancy is "unnecessary" (our brains make use of redundancy in many cases.)
  B - Generally true, although you could set the post title to "" and have code that says If post_title = "" Then Display Topic Title. That would keep the database smaller (and fix people who cleared the post title just to make a point ).
  C - There's that subjective word "unnecessary" again. Personally I don't find it difficult to read now. Conduct a usability study and prove me wrong.
  D - All of them? Even if they had, though, so what? The phpBB team has often said that they don't do things just because other boards do.
  E - So what? Not everything has to benefit search engines. Now if you say that it hurts SEO (which I think that somebody did), that might be a valid point.
  F - How does it make moderating posts easier if the post title is gone?
  G - I don't believe that it simplifies post display in any truly significant way.
  H - True, but that truncation could be fixed by making the post title longer than the topic title.
  I - What does "correctly" mean? That seems subjective again. Plus, I gave an example where it provides some "threading" which I think helps readability, especially in long topics.
  J - True, but if you argue that very few people actually change the post title, then it still helps. You can't have it both ways.
  K - You could always link to posts before. You can't really "link by title" anyway (maybe the original post meant "reference", not link, but a true link is better anyway). So I agree that reason #7 is invalid.
  L - Maybe most users don't change post titles, but some do. Why remove a feature that some people are currently using?
  M - This doesn't really rebut point #2 at all. Telling how it could be done still requires developer time to implement it.
  N - Again with the subjective word "better". You're presuming that most people feel that the change would be for the better. Plenty of people here don't seem to agree.

Ok lets simplify that list down then to the valid arguments cause their really a very few on both sides if any.

Reasons For Keeping

• 1 - Completely subjective and not a valid argument
  2 - Possibly but not everything PR is done by the DEVs so in that respect this is not a valid statement
  3 - Agree some people use the software in different ways. Which would mean a study would need to be conducted to determine its uses. This would require more time than anything.
  4 - If anything it would be a negative to search engines especially on smaller boards as you would have repeating header content.
  5 - How is this semantic at all the way that it is implemented. I think you misunderstand what semantic means.
  6 - Valid, but but I would not limit it to moderators as everyone can see the title.
  7 - Completely invalid link is still their and no one is saying that it would not be re-worked
  8 - Invalid as its worded, the point was when he opens in a new tab the title is at the top of his screen when viewing that tab. But this could be an isolated use more study required
  9 - Not sure I fully understand this one. Leaving original title for searching? Searching is based on DB so as long as the move functions keep the previous title tracked it can still be displayed in search results

Reasons For Removing

• A - This is a preference
  B - Valid
  C - This is a preference
  D - Still valid as they have a reason its because of a shift in philosophy by them though we treat them as email replies where they treat them as comments to the original topic.
  E - inValid
  F - ??????
  G - This is a preference
  H - Valid
  I - This is a preference
  J - Valid
  K - Not needed as point is thrown out
  L - based on what source?
  M - Not a point but a suggestion
  N - Not needed as point a is invalid

given all this here are the only valid points that I see.

Reasons For Keeping

• 3 - It's conceivable that someone uses phpbb in a way that uses topic titles for organization
  6 - Helps to see where the posts came from
  8 - When opening individual subtopics in new tabs they have the title

Reasons For Removing

• B - Enlarges database with unnecessary text
  D - Other forums have removed it as they now treat post replies as comments to the original topic
  H - Moving a post suffers from "cut off" due to titles being too long (RE:)
  J - Doesn't help track where posts came from if subtitle was changed... Could also add "moved from" info to admin/moderator log

[Darkness_demoN]

I was browsing some posts on the blizzard forums and noticed they have no repeating post subject, like phpbb does. They have instead the number of the post to link to.

Each topic, on any forum platform has one main title.
Why must each post have the option to give it a new subject, or just repeat the same text hundreds of times ?
I dont see any good use of it and it enlarges the database with lots of useless-repeating text.

Their layout seems easier to read as after you read post1, you move your eyesight to the next text which is the next post, not the next post title/subject and then the post... Maybe phpbb4 could go for a layout alike theirs?

EDIT: Having the Repeated topic subject seems to cause seo issues too..
http://www.phpbb-seo.com/en/phpbb-forum ... e5964.html

I don't like the idea. When i click that number i dont see the reason behind the post ( topic title ). Also i don't like blizzard forums.

[Un1matr1x]

[...]
given all this here are the only valid points that I see.
Reasons For Keeping

• 3 - It's conceivable that someone uses phpbb in a way that uses topic titles for organization
  6 - Helps to see where the posts came from
  8 - When opening individual subtopics in new tabs they have the title

Reasons For Removing

• B - Enlarges database with unnecessary text
  D - Other forums have removed it as they now treat post replies as comments to the original topic
  H - Moving a post suffers from "cut off" due to titles being too long (RE:)
  J - Doesn't help track where posts came from if subtitle was changed... Could also add "moved from" info to admin/moderator log

3 - That's exactly what I, as a admin, do, f.e.: Thread a downtime will come (asap info) (Boardupdate planned), 2nd post with title changed to Announce(Donwtime 2014-06-23 23:00), 3rd post, also a new title (Updated to 3.1.0 ...) post will have changelog, ...

6 vs. H/J - this round is even

B vs. J optional - Logs will also cause additional space

D - Other forums did is invalide, if I found other forums that spread malware you don't want this @ phpBB - or do you? (+ what Pony99CA repeaded, what the devs said in the past)

So at the end it's about individuel links or dislikes and a half extension for removing is allready shown, so why not keep it

[hanakin]

[...]
given all this here are the only valid points that I see.
Reasons For Keeping

• 3 - It's conceivable that someone uses phpbb in a way that uses topic titles for organization
  6 - Helps to see where the posts came from
  8 - When opening individual subtopics in new tabs they have the title

Reasons For Removing

• B - Enlarges database with unnecessary text
  D - Other forums have removed it as they now treat post replies as comments to the original topic
  H - Moving a post suffers from "cut off" due to titles being too long (RE:)
  J - Doesn't help track where posts came from if subtitle was changed... Could also add "moved from" info to admin/moderator log

3 - That's exactly what I, as a admin, do, f.e.: Thread a downtime will come (asap info) (Board update planned), 2nd post with title changed to Announce(Downtime 2014-06-23 23:00), 3rd post, also a new title (Updated to 3.1.0 ...) post will have change log, ...

6 vs. H/J - this round is even

B vs. J optional - Logs will also cause additional space

D - Other forums did is invalid, if I found other forums that spread malware you don't want this @ phpBB - or do you? (+ what Pony99CA repeated, what the devs said in the past)

So at the end it's about individual links or dislikes and a half extension for removing is already shown, so why not keep it

B vs. J - Logs are not loaded by everyone also not sure why we are comparing pros for removal against each other I think you ment B, J

D - is perfectly valid, I am not saying do as they do just because. I am saying its a valid argument because they treat it more semantic than we do.

As I already stated...

They treat all posts as comments to the original post where as we treat the original post as an email message and all subsequent posts as replies to that message.

They are correct semantically by definition of a forum and simplicity of information! Our way is stale as its semantically based on old school message boards which are quite dated and the posts have no relation to each other semantically other than by hacking in and repeating the title.

[Pony99CA]

Here's a perfect example of why changing post titles is useful. A new user created a New user needs help topic. That title is obviously useless, so I changed my reply title to Need a Page to Show All Uploaded Attachments. That way, if people are searching by post titles, they'll have a chance of finding my post with good keywords.

You can argue that the Moderator team should have changed the title of the topic (and I agree), but they don't seem to do that here.

Steve

[keith10456]

Here's a perfect example of why changing post titles is useful. A new user created a New user needs help topic. That title is obviously useless, so I changed my reply title to Need a Page to Show All Uploaded Attachments. That way, if people are searching by post titles, they'll have a chance of finding my post with good keywords.

You can argue that the Moderator team should have changed the title of the topic (and I agree), but they don't seem to do that here.

Steve

Exactly right about the Moderator team.

[Dragosvr92]

Okay, i guess this wont be removed so How about we display the same topic title everywhere, where there is no titlechange, instead of entering the same title again and again?