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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Placement of menu items
From:       Don Sanders <sanders () kde ! org>
Date:       2000-08-03 9:48:39
[Download RAW message or body]

That was an interesting mail I'm glad you sent it.

Waldo, if you want to take care of the placement/naming of menu items I'm ok 
with that. The job basically seems to require:
A) A knowledge of how other KDE apps menus are arranged and why they are 
arranged that way. (So KMail can be consistent with them).
B) A holistic approach considering all of KMail's menu's.

I practically never use the menu items anyway (only for the settings dialog), 
and you have already put more effort into A & B above than I want to so if 
you want the responsibility it's all yours (unless Stefan objects I guess).

I would rather work on other things like the fact that some keyboard 
shortcuts like Ctrl-Enter for send mail have to be pressed multiple times to 
take effect (been that way for about a month now).

BFN,
Don.

On Wed, 02 Aug 2000, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000, Don Sanders wrote:
> > I can't decide where some menu items should go the tricky ones are
>
> It is very hard to come up with reasonable menus once an application is
> past a certain complexity.
>
> > main window
> >  addressbook - file, settings or a new menu tools?
>
> Tools
>
> >  compact all folders - I don't know, under file at the moment.
>
> Can't think of a better place.
>
> >  search in messages - is edit normal? Otherwise tools.
>
> "Folder" would be better, you search the folder for a certain message.
>
> > composer
> >   addressbook - message, settings or a new menu tools
>
> tools
>
> >   spelling - edit or tools
>
> tools
>
> I also wrote a large piece about the rest of KMail's menu. Almost wanted to
> delete it but didn't do it because it took me an hour to type it so on the
> risk of boring you to dead... here it is:
>
> I think it is important to view the application as a whole when making the
> menus. Approaching an application from an object oriented point of view,
> you should be able to describe the function of an application in a single
> sentence. That's the core functionality. Usually there are a few supporting
> concepts around it. Looking at kmail there are basically two applications:
> the mail reader and the mail composer.
>
> The function of the mail reader is to "read mail".
>
> The function of the mail composer is to "write a message".
>
> Supporting concepts of the mail reader are: mail is divided across folders,
> folders contains single messages, a message contains headers and a body.
> That's what you see back in the user interface: list of folders, list of
> messages, the message you are reading.
>
> I think that the menu should try to follow that model. There are operations
> on folders, on messages and on message content. We do that to some extent.
> There is the Folder menu that describes actions on a folder. There is the
> Message menu that desribes actions on messages. The actions on "messages
> content" don't have a clear location. I can see some basic problems. One is
> that we have an enormous amount of operations that operate on "messages".
> The other is that we have very little operations that operate on "message
> content". The result seems to be that we have a very large "Message" menu
> and that some operations on messages ended up in the "Edit" menu. Also in
> the "Edit" menu is "Find in message". I think that it should be very clear
> whether operations in the "Edit" menu operate on the message contents or on
> the message as a whole. E.g. "Does Edit->Copy copy the whole message or
> only the text selected in the message?". Does the copy-cut-paste concept
> apply to the mailreader? Does an Edit menu make sense?
>
> I had a hard look at the Message menu and tried to look at commonalities. I
> have made some categories that I could find:
>
> "Navigation"/"Go"/"Select": All options that involve selecting a certain
> message. E.g. next, next unread, previous, previous unread, search
> messages, select all.
>
> "Compose"/"Send": All options that cause a new message to be send. E.g. New
> Message, Reply, Reply All, Forward, Redirect, Bounce, Send Again.
>
> "Message"/"Location": Options that change the location of the message. E.g
> Move to, copy to , apply filters, delete, undo.
>
> "Edit":  Options that change the message itself, or operate on the message
> contents. E.g. Copy text, Find in text, Edit, Set status
>
> I left over "View source" which would fit in nicely in the "View" menu.
>
> I'm not sure whether the 4 groups should match to 4 menus or whether some
> of them should be combined. Putting the first 3 in a single menu leads to a
> menu that is to big I think. The "Edit" one should probably stay seperate
> from the rest.
>
> Maybe combining 1 and 3 would be nice, that would give a "Message" menu, an
> "Edit" menu and a "Compose"/"Send" menu. ("Send" is better I think)
> The "search messages" and "select all" would be a little odd in the
> "Message" though.
>
> Combining 2 and 3 would give a "Select", "Message" and "Edit" menu. I guess
> that will work better.
>
> With this division it would clear that e.g. a yet-to-be-made select-all
> that selects all text in the message view window would belong in the "Edit"
> menu.
>
> Cheers,
> Waldo

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