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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] attachment column
From:       Till Adam <adam () kde ! org>
Date:       2004-02-22 23:05:34
Message-ID: 200402230005.35875.adam () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 22 February 2004 23:22, Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> On Sunday 22 February 2004 21:00, Till Adam wrote:
> > On Sunday 22 February 2004 17:32, Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> > > On Sunday 22 February 2004 17:01, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 22 February 2004 14:44, Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > the attached patch adds a new column that shows if the email has an
> > > > > attachment. You can add that column with a right-click on the
> > > > > header-column or via the configuration. It also cleans up the
> > > > > column code a bit. I had to comment out two sections in
> > > > > kmheaders.cpp that overwrite the columnheader and therefore delete
> > > > > the attachment icon that is shown. I didn't encounter any
> > > > > drawbacks, perhaps these two parts are not needed?
> > > >
> > > > Without having looked at the patch I wonder why we need an extra
> > > > column for this while we don't need one for all the other status
> > > > icons. (Some people will disagree that we don't need an extra
> > > > column.)
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to see the normal message icons being overlayed with a paper
> > > > clip in case the message has an attachment. This way the information
> > > > would not occupy any additional space (which is important for people
> > > > with small displays).
> > >
> > > I thought a lot about this question before I started with the
> > > implementation. The reasons why I didn't want to add it to the normal
> > > status icons (no matter how you do it):
> > >
> > > - it's not really a status as you can't switch it (like unread, read,
> > > ...). I use the status field to save it because it don't want another
> > > field in the index
> >
> > I don't think it is a good idea to put more stuff into the status field
> > simply because it is comparatively easy to do so. As you say yourself, it
> > is not a status. Maybe we need a generic "property map" entry in the
> > index that can hold such boolean properties of messages as a bit map.
>
> Well, every new entry takes space but in the end I don't really care where
> we add it. But if we add such a map we should move signature/encryption
> also there.

Arguably, yes. Mark, could we abuse the encryption entry as a more generic 
property map?

> > The ability to search for these properties in a quick manner would allow
> > us to do stuff like "sender is in address book" or somesuch much more
> > easily.
> >
> > > - not everybody might want to see it
> >
> > Hiding it is possible either way.
>
> So you want to display it along with the other icons and just hide it via
> the configuration, like the crypto icons?

Yes.

> > > - you can sort your emails according to an extra column (which I do
> > > from time to time e.g. when I clean up)
> >
> > Sorting by attachment makes little sense, I think. Not a strong argument
> > for me either.
>
> I see, you're not forced to work with Outlook/Exchange ;-) I sort my trash
> folder by attachments and delete those first to free space.

Size works for that even better. ;)

> > > That's why I think an extra column is better. Apart from the fact that
> > > all mua's I know handle it like this ...(which doesn't have to be an
> > > argument ;-)).
> >
> > I think all others are wrong here. :) Having a visual indicator is of
> > course a nice thing, and I think we need it, but I don't think a separate
> > column is a good idea.
>
> What is more intuitive? I don't really know.
> I fear that we'll end up with too many icons in our status-column. If you
> have an encrypted message with attachment that you replied to you'll have 4
> icons. Is that still concise?

Well, let's optimize for the common case. I'm assuming that the majority of 
mails do not have attachments and most have only one status. Two at the 
maximum. For those "normal" mails the KMail way wastes less space because it 
doesn't need an extra column. For the case of an important, replied, 
forwarded, signed, encrypted mail with attachments it sucks. But that is not 
the common case, I think. And having columns for each of those would not make 
things any prettier for that particular mail, I imagine.

Till
_______________________________________________
KMail developers mailing list
KMail-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel

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