I agree with this and I think it's a nice general statement of one of
the first challenges for a full PIM, that of getting *all* the P.I. in
one place first for centrality, a complete system being the first step
for a trusted system. I would just like to be parsimonious in how many
things we have to implement to achieve that completeness. The more
moving pieces, the more bugs, and in this case, more system management,
a burden on the user even before encountering bugs (and firewalls, and
more).
lisa
On Jan 13, 2006, at 5:16 PM, Andi Vajda wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Mimi Yin wrote:
I believe Lisa may be referring to the one-item in multiple locations
data model incompatibility.
So what ? To IMAP it'd just look like the item is in one location,
even though it isn't.
I find Morgen's idea very intriguing....
Its benefit is not the IMAP part, it's the workaround-the-lack-of-UI
part. Being able to stuff chandler with my email data, yet 'do email'
from whatever email client I choose is an exact fit for me for the
time being.
I'd argue that implementing the right email UI is considerably harder
than doing what Morgen suggests, especially given that our focus still
is going to be elsewhere for 0.7.
Why not extend Morgen's idea to IRC ? I'd love to be able to have IRC
go through Chandler so that I can later search IRC logs, yet use
Colloquy until Chandler gets an IRC UI. Likewise with RSS ? etc.... ?
Basically, I interpret Morgen's idea as making Chandler a proxy for
all sorts of data that Chandler can index, log, serve and even render
... at times.
It would make Chandler much more useful beyond a calendar much sooner
since implementing these proxies is vastly easier than the UI to
render all these kinds of data.
Andi..
On Jan 13, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Morgen Sagen wrote:
On Jan 13, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
I believe there are far easier ways of getting the exact features,
and definitely the benefits, of what you suggest - without doing
something so unaesthetic (and incompatible with our data model) as
an IMAP server.
Lisa
Does your email client speak some other protocol, Lisa? :-) I
don't see what's incompatible here. We're already stamping emails
as tasks. This is essentially another way to do that.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
