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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: KMail User Interface summary ? :)
From:       Ingo =?iso-8859-1?q?Kl=F6cker?= <ingo.kloecker () epost ! de>
Date:       2001-05-31 22:41:56
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday, 31. May 2001 14:10, Marc Mutz wrote:
> Before coming up with this kind of arguments, please consider the
> _current_ situation. And you'll see that the current situation sucks
> much, much more.
>
> Currently, if you reply to a forwarded message, what do you get?
> Currently, if you mark a message with the flag (what I like to call
> "important"), and reply to it, what do you get?
> Currently, if you forward a message from a filter, what do you get?

I know and I don't like the current displaying of the status very much 
either. This is why I wanted to have some suggestions how this problem 
with various status flags for a message can be solved. To be honest, I 
have no idea. The only thing I don't want to have is an individual icon 
for each status a message has. This would certainly clutter up the 
header list very much.
Maybe a good idea would be to have the icons which are already 
available and additionally some nice combined icons for two stati (for 
example for mails which you have replied to and which you have 
forwarded).
The flag ("important") could maybe go into a separate column (which one 
should be able to disable). This would allow the user to sort by this  
column. A good default location for this column would be behind the 
date column.
The attachment icon IMHO isn't really useful. Also there are several 
other special situations which would deserve an icon, for example a pen 
for signed messages and a key (or something else) for encrypted 
messages. We could even show a green pen if the signature is valid, a 
red pen if the signature is invalid and a blue key if the signature 
can't be verified because the needed key isn't in the user's key ring. 
BTW, I don't really want the pen and key icon. These icons would 
overload the header list too much. I just wanted to point out that at 
least for me these icons would be much more important than an icon for 
attachments. I think an icon for attachments is maybe useful for 
paranoid Windows user who want to avoid messages with attachments for 
some good reasons. But what is a good reason for a unix user to have 
this icon. Just because it's nowadays almost "standard" (I don't think 
that features become "standard" just because nsmail and msoe provide 
them.) is no valid argument for this icon.

Regards,
Ingo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE7Fsi5GnR+RTDgudgRAh7SAKDiKC112UgD1fKPQ8PneIgzsNyS+wCfddwF
y3SacpE/Zt+t0Qz/0w6lBhg=
=oIOz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Kmail Developers mailing list
Kmail@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

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