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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: KMail User Interface summary ? :)
From:       Marc Mutz <Marc.Mutz () uni-bielefeld ! de>
Date:       2001-06-01 14:13:09
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 01 June 2001 00:41, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
<snip>
> 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.
<snip>

Very good point. ACK.

Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <Marc@Mutz.com>
http://marc.mutz.com/
http://www.mathematik.uni-bielefeld.de/~mmutz/
http://EncryptionHOWTO.sourceforge.net/

_______________________________________________
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]