[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Operations on the parent of a closed thread
From:       Carsten Burghardt <burghardt () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-03-30 17:00:15
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 30 March 2003 18:03, Till Adam wrote:
> On Sunday 30 March 2003 18:10, Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 March 2003 16:18, Till Adam wrote:
> > > > - A closed selected thread should be marked different from a thread
> > > > where only the top-level messages is selected (e. g. by changing the
> > > > color of the [+]/[-] thingie). Else it won't be possible to tell the
> > > > difference between a selected thread (which was selected by selecting
> > > > the root of a closed thread) and a selected top-level message (which
> > > > was selected when the thread was open but then the thread was
> > > > closed).
> > >
> > > Ok, marking it different sounds like a good additional hint.
> >
> > Yes but I'm curious how that can be achieved with QListViewItems. I guess
> > you'll have to do the painting yourself.
>
> Sounds painfull. How about a new symbol to the right of the [+] like the
> ones for replied or important?

Well, this is no state so I doubt that people would see it. A different colour 
or something would be probably better.

> > > > BTW, what does your patch do if I select the top-level message of a
> > > > thread and then close the thread? As you patched
> > > > KMHeaders::selectedMsgs() I guess that after closing the thread the
> > > > complete thread will be treated as selected which is IMO wrong
> > > > behavior.
> > >
> > > Why is that wrong? For me a closed thread is a unit, represented by the
> > > parent. Actions on the parent should be executed on the unit, which
> > > means all messages of the thread. Collapsing a thread is making a unit
> > > out of the messages in it, therefor collapsing a thread with a selected
> > > parent is selecting that whole thread. That is consistent and
> > > intuitive, in my opinion.
> >
> > No because you don't see the messages that you are deleting. So you want
> > to introduce a behaviour that operates on some messages without actually
> > showing them. This could be efficient if you know it but what if you
> > think you operate only on the selected message?
>
> Then you undo. ;) Ok, how about making this an off-by-default option after
> all and implementing some kind of visual clue that the whole thread is
> selected and not only the single parent message? That way the default
> behavior isn't changed and people don't accidently delete their spam, yet
> those who find the new behavior more intuitive can activate it. Do you also

Good idea.

> think that collapsing a thread whose parent is selected should not select
> the thread, as Ingo does?

Isn't that what I answered above?

_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]