On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> wrote: >> May be move the link to some more visible place than end of header line, >> which people usually ignore. I suggest to replace "Thread:" by "Whole >> Thread:" and make it linkable. Also, add explanation text into ALT tag.
> I'm not sure that's a good idea. That seems to overload a lot of meaning > into that field which if anything would be more confusing. Many people will > probably just think it's another header.
> That said, I'm not saying it shouldn't be made more visible, I just don't > think that is a good way of doing it.
We already made one change to make this functionality more visible. Let's wait and see if that seems to solve the problem before making more-invasive changes.
(Do we have any way of tracking how many visits to the "flat" URLs there are? If there's a spike since we changed that, it would suggest that more people are picking up on what the link is for.)
Nothing easy, I think.
We have Google Analytics on the site, and it's possible to search for flat. As some examples, I can see that during September, we had about 715,000 views of messages, of which about 2,800 hit the flatpages, so about 0.39%. If I set it to just the last week, the value is 0.41%. Pretty sure that so far it's within the margin of error, but we need some more time to determine it.