On Saturday 20 August 2005 01:15, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Friday 19 August 2005 13:02, Tomasz Grobelny wrote:
> > I thought of adding language detection to KMail. It could be used
> > when you reply to somebody's mail to put "On %d you wrote:" phrase in
> > appropriate language. And that works fine on my desktop. Additionally
> > it should change signature and dictionary. And maybe other things
> > which we together call identity. In that case usability questions
> > come to mind:
> > 1. Why are phrases not part of identities?
>
> In no particular order:
> - for historical reasons
> - because identities are already overloaded enough with settings
> - there's no clear connection between identities and reply phrases
>
The connection is at least as clear as between identity and signature (can be 
formal or informal, in English or Polish in my case).

> A possible solution (although it's probably not so good usability-wise):
> - the user can add multiple sets of phrases, each set can consist of
> phrases in multiple languages
Why in one set there should be phrases in multiple languages? What will 
phrases in one set have in common?

> - the user associates an identity with one set of phrases
> - KMail automagically chooses the phrases in the correct language from
> the set of phrases associated to the current identity
>
> This solution is flexible because it allows multiple sets of phrases,
> e.g. one set with formal phrases and one set with informal phrases.
> OTOH, this solution is convenient because it automatically chooses the
> correct language for the phrases.
>
> Adding phrases directly to the identities won't happen.
>
Originally I thought about doing it the same way it is done with transport: if 
I choose identity A then use set of phrases B (where by set of phrases I mean 
4 phases in one language: reply to author, reply all, etc.).

> > 2. How should information on language be put into identity?
> > Note that language detection is just one example that I can
> > theoretically implement in a few days, but from usability standpoint
> > it should work well even if one day we will be able to tell if the
> > e-mail we are replying is formal or informal, kind or rude, or
> > whatever.
>
> See above. There's no reason to associate identities with just one
> particular language. In fact, I'd like to get rid of the dictionary
> setting for identities. Just like the language for the reply phrases
> the correct dictionary should be chosen automagically. There would just
So the idea is to break up identity into two parts: language specific and 
language independent?
-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Grobelny
_______________________________________________
KMail developers mailing list
KMail-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel