On 25/gen/2010, at 00.46, Caio Chassot wrote:
> On 2010-01-24, at 17:16 , Davide 'Folletto' Casali wrote: >> >> >> Letters [W] Windows [20100124]: >> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/72666/Letters/Letters%20%5BW%5D%20Windows%20%5B20100124%5D.pdf > > # Message window: > > Where's the NNW-style widescreen view? Mail-style 3-pane is a total waste of > space. I refer back to rentzsch. > (http://rentzsch.com/notes/widescreenNetNewsWire) I've just added a generic one with the labels, I'm still not sure how the discussion about it is ended / will end. I think that some permutations exists... I'm just not sure which will be pushed forward for 1.0. At this time, I could probably bet on: . 3-cols view (sidebar + list + mail thread . 2-cols view (sidebar + list and mail thread together) . 1-col view (sidebar closed, mail view pane closed) Maybe a word from our Leader will be useful :) >> And here is where we meet the reason for my dislike of the classic >> email-style three paned view: it stacks two vertical-space-hungry views on >> top of another. Specifically, the "subjects" view and the "content" view >> both tend to want most of my vertical screen real estate. Of course, neither >> can win, since they're stacked up. The end result is that both scroll their >> content. Lots of scrolling is unfun. > > Also: conversation view instead of single-message view. Yes! :) That's about threading: it's in the Wireframe [T] Threads ;) The single message is a popup that I think is a must have (I don't think there's anybody against it, or am I wrong?). > # Composer window > > I like gmail-style inline replies. Easy to refer back to the entire thread. > > Doesn't need to happen in the same window as gmail does, tho. That's a web > limitation. > > Could happen in the same window with a split view, the thread showing above. > Other ideas? I agree. I'll elaborate a bit more the Threads wireframes. ;) Sill, I know many persons (me included) that prepare multiple mails in parallel (that's one of the reasons I don't use the Gmail web app) this is not possible or very hard with an inline reply (while I agree it's very important in threaded discussions). If we'll go with the threads/gmail style, what's your position on the possibility of a detachable reply window? > Another thing: the headers. I'm not sure tabbing is the best navigation > method. Maybe if the headers were half-free-form? Specifically, they'd belong > inside the main text area. You wouldn't be able to edit the header names, > etc, but navigation to and fro and be less rigid than distinct text fields > for each header. I think this leads to a more compact, navigable, and > light-weight view. In mail, the header fields take up waaay too much space. I'm not really sure about it. I'd like a different graphic from current mail programs (something where the Subject is like a "title" of the email for example) but I don't think free-form is for me. For the light-weigthness I'd work on the graphic, not on the input method. |D _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com
