Thomas E Deweese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>    '(bbdb-display-list
>         '((net         . all)           ;; Show in all views
>           (phone       . all)
>           (address     . multi-line)    ;; show in mult-line and full views
>           (attribution . one-line-only) ;; Only show in one-line
>           (pilot-id    . full )         ;; Only show in 'full' view.
>           (timestamp   . nil)           ;; Don't even show this in 'full' mode.
>           (t           . multi-line))   ;; 't is fallback case...
> 

At first I liked this idea.  It seems pretty clear.  What I don't like
about it is the cdr values.  Right now we have "never display",
"full", "one-line/elided", "all".  What happens when someone comes up
with another type of view?  It seems like the cdr should be a list
itself of the possible views for that field.  That would still allow
nil to work as advertised here.  I guess you could also use t for "all
views".

    '(bbdb-display-list
            '((net         . t)
              (phone       . t)
              (address     . (multi-line full))
              (attribution . (one-line))
              (pilot-id    . (full))
              (timestamp   . nil)
              (t           . (multi-line))))

> RF> Yes you have to add it by hand.
> 
>     IMHO this is _really_ _really_ bad! In general it is much better
> to show everything, and let people select what they don't want than to
> start off showing nothing and force people to add stuff if they want
> to see it (since usually they won't know what they are missing).
> 
>     I would support a mechanism for people to explictily say, don't
> show anything unless I say so (such as putting '(t . nil) in the
> a-list), but the default should be to show everything, and have people
> take action to hide items they aren't interested in.

I would probably agree with this too.

> >> See `make-obsolete-variable'.
> 
> RF> And howlong do one retains this before removing the variable
> RF> finally?
> 
>     Probably until it bit-rots (ie it starts breaking things and no
> one is willing to contribute patches, or it gets in the way of another
> larger patch).

Generally speaking, I'm in favor of not changing the perspective from
the user unless you have to.  However, if we're going to change it
then let's change it.  None of this mamsy-pamsy hand holding.  Just
put something in the commentary/readme/web page that says, "Hey, this
no longer works.  Change it".
-- 
 (__) Doug Alcorn (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lathi.net)
 oo / PGP 02B3 1E26 BCF2 9AAF 93F1  61D7 450C B264 3E63 D543
 |_/  If you're a capitalist and you have the best goods and they're
      free, you don't have to proselytize, you just have to wait. 


_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/

Reply via email to