Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

Hi Carl,

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 02:27, Carl Simpson  wrote:

>
> 2011/1/15 Matthew Paul Thomas 
>
>
>> It's a fair point that using "Offline" as an IM status might be confused
>> with Internet connectivity. However, it's been used that way in most IM
>> clients for a long time. So any replacement would have to be *so* much
>> less confusing (and/or quicker, and/or fun) that it would be worth the
>> loss in familiarity.
>>
>
>  Off the top of my head, I thought of:
> “Signed out”
> “Signed off”
> “Logged out”
> “Logged off”
> and all of those with "of IM" on the end.
>
> I don't think any of those are any better than "Offline" though, I'm not
> any kind of designer, and I have done no research. :)
>

thanks for your input, these are all well thought through and look
reasonable.
I'd just want to add "Quit Chat" for formal reasons: It is Empathy's
terminology for the action this menu item currently represents.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

hi mpt,

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 23:38, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:

>
> frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 04/01/11 10:34:
> >...
> > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 15:49, Matthew Paul Thomas  >...
> >> frederik.nn...@gmail.com  wrote on
> >> 17/12/10 15:18:
> >...
> >>> i'd like to add another issue that contributes to the problem:
> >>> We have no "connected to the internet" indicator.
> >>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/lucid-online-status
> >>
> >> That looks like a useful feature, but I don't understand how it's
> >> relevant to this discussion.
> >
> > Because having in indicator for whether or not i'm connected to the
> > internet already untangles the semantic confusion of having a button
> > called "Offline" in the Me Menu to a great extent.
>
> It's a fair point that using "Offline" as an IM status might be confused
> with Internet connectivity. However, it's been used that way in most IM
> clients for a long time. So any replacement would have to be *so* much
> less confusing (and/or quicker, and/or fun) that it would be worth the
> loss in familiarity.
>

how about
"turn off chat" | "turn on chat"
"disable chat" | "enable chat"
?



> >...
> >>> * always keep Presence controls active, regardless of IM¹
> >>
> >> What use would that be? How would you avoid wasting people's time, by
> >> wrongly implying that it's useful for them to toggle between "brb" and
> >> "In a meeting" (for example) when they're not even online?
> >
> > I'd say Notify OSD and e.g. power management or the screensaver service
> > would like to know if i'm busy doing something, even if that would mean
> > i'm only staring at the screen, or there's a standing picture being
> > displayed. Your point makes perfect sense, but i'm not talking about
> > the Presence controls in Online-only fashion, i see them as a status
> > relevant to the local system also.
>
> Hence the question. Are there any statuses relevant to the local system
> other than "Available" and "Busy"? If so, how are they relevant? And if
> not, how could we avoid people thinking they were?
>

yeah, that's my thinking too, it's a problem yet to be solved :D
so let me try:
Local Presence controls are totally inconsistent with the ones in Contact
List.
At some point it might have been convenient to give them a certain
similarity, but today after a few distrubutions old inconsistencies, it
surely is valid to consider presenting Presence differently in the Me Menu.
First of all, what the user needs is a way to tell others when he/she is
currently unavailable. Status text is inadequate for that purpose, fast
status switching is definitely wanted.
So, to accellerate interaction here, it might make sense to thin out the
states we currently afford to the user for quick Ix in the Me Menu..
Google, Facebook, Myspace, all of these offer a max of 2 states configurable
by the user. Skype is the only service i know of which still defends the
concept of having a lot of status presets.
Actually, all the protocol permits is "available" and "unavailable". Then,
there's "out of contact", i.e. offline. I never liked invisible, and it
doesn't work on e.g. facebook.
The optimum Presence system tells my contacts whether i am available for
conversation, if i am idle or afk or if i'm simply unavailable, this
automatically to the greater part.
Imagine you have set an appointment in your calendar, told the calendar to
show you as "busy" or "not available" for the time of the appointment, Me
Menu Presence should know of that and communicate it to the contacts in your
Places > People.

I would like to discuss idle vs away.
In Me Menu i would want to have Busy or Do Not Disturb as a 2 state button,
which can be on or off. Away would be an automatic state, timed in sync with
what the screensaver preferences page and the power management preferences
page both call "idle".

If somebody wanted to override the MeMenu / Ubuntu Presence state, that
person would, in such a configuration, have to open the IM Client and do it
there.
The override would remain in place, until another state change in the Me
Menu is commanded by the user.

This is quite simple thinking i know, but it's what i come up with after
months of thinking about this, and believe me, it had me sleepless many a
night..f :P

Here's what i propose:
keep Presence in the Me Menu simple enough to be applicable in both local
and public (e.g. IM) use cases.
States that should be reachable:
* available
* busy | do not disturb
* chat: off


> >>> * remove "Available", since it is identical with the regular Presence
> >>> state for IM and the Desktop Session
>

Available is the state that is active, if no special state (e.g. unavailable
or auto-afk) is active.


 >...
> > I wasn't sure whether stopping and starting services belonged into the
> > launcher and dash, rather than into the status indicators..
> > I also can't find the policy on that anymore.. perhaps someone can
> > help?
>
> I haven't writte

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Carl Simpson]

2011/1/15 Matthew Paul Thomas 

>
> It's a fair point that using "Offline" as an IM status might be confused
> with Internet connectivity. However, it's been used that way in most IM
> clients for a long time. So any replacement would have to be *so* much
> less confusing (and/or quicker, and/or fun) that it would be worth the
> loss in familiarity.
>

 Off the top of my head, I thought of:
“Signed out”
“Signed off”
“Logged out”
“Logged off”
and all of those with "of IM" on the end.

I don't think any of those are any better than "Offline" though, I'm not any
kind of designer, and I have done no research. :)
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 04/01/11 10:34:
>...
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 15:49, Matthew Paul Thomas ...
>> frederik.nn...@gmail.com  wrote on
>> 17/12/10 15:18:
>...
>>> i'd like to add another issue that contributes to the problem:
>>> We have no "connected to the internet" indicator.
>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/lucid-online-status
>>
>> That looks like a useful feature, but I don't understand how it's
>> relevant to this discussion.
> 
> Because having in indicator for whether or not i'm connected to the
> internet already untangles the semantic confusion of having a button
> called "Offline" in the Me Menu to a great extent.

It's a fair point that using "Offline" as an IM status might be confused
with Internet connectivity. However, it's been used that way in most IM
clients for a long time. So any replacement would have to be *so* much
less confusing (and/or quicker, and/or fun) that it would be worth the
loss in familiarity.

>...
>>> * always keep Presence controls active, regardless of IM¹
>> 
>> What use would that be? How would you avoid wasting people's time, by
>> wrongly implying that it's useful for them to toggle between "brb" and
>> "In a meeting" (for example) when they're not even online?
> 
> I'd say Notify OSD and e.g. power management or the screensaver service
> would like to know if i'm busy doing something, even if that would mean
> i'm only staring at the screen, or there's a standing picture being
> displayed. Your point makes perfect sense, but i'm not talking about
> the Presence controls in Online-only fashion, i see them as a status
> relevant to the local system also.

Hence the question. Are there any statuses relevant to the local system
other than "Available" and "Busy"? If so, how are they relevant? And if
not, how could we avoid people thinking they were?

>>> * remove "Available", since it is identical with the regular Presence
>>> state for IM and the Desktop Session
>> 
>> What regular presence state?
> 
> that's a known bug (
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/568161 )

That bug report is about remembering custom states, not about whether
"Available" should exist.

>...
> I wasn't sure whether stopping and starting services belonged into the
> launcher and dash, rather than into the status indicators..
> I also can't find the policy on that anymore.. perhaps someone can
> help?

I haven't written it up yet, but you could regard music playback and
wireless connection as examples of services that are accessed from
indicator menus.

>...
>> That's not practical. We'll still interrupt you when you have only a
>> few minutes battery left, or when your hard disk is dying -- as well
>> we should.
> 
> that's clear, and valid, but nothing less critical would be.

True.

>> So, any global knob would be for "fewer interruptions", not "no
>> interruptions". And this would make it impractical to communicate.
> 
> True, i know this from audio workstations, they tried to communicate
> that a certain mode would enable "zero latency", which is physically
> unachievable. So the industry leader ( AVID ) called their
> implementation "Low Latency". I think Low Interruption is not a good
> name, but Do Not Disturb, Silent Mode or Notifications Off or any of
> the like would be quite good approximations of what i am trying to
> establish here..

Yes -- even if you have a "Do Not Disturb" sign on your door, the hotel
staff will still knock to evacuate you in a fire, so it is a decent
parallel. There's much more cultural understanding of that sort of thing
than of a menu item that no-one will have ever seen before.

>> Fewer than what, exactly?
> 
> Yes, clearly that's the main point against this all, i think Ubuntu is
> already so well designed and balanced, the interruptions that occur are
> all wanted, when in the appropriate state e.g. Available or Idle.

Maybe so; personally I think we're still on the chatty side, especially
for networking.

Regardless, you and I both are deeply familiar with Ubuntu as an OS. But
people who barely understand what an OS is would need a very simple
explanation of "fewer than what", of what "normal" means. If we can't do
that, it doesn't deserve top-level system-level prominence.

>> And why would people ever *not* choose fewer interruptions?
> 
> There are states in which i want to be notified aggressively i.e.
> interrupted, and there are states in which i can't afford being
> interrupted. In such a state of course i would make sure my battery is
> charged or i'm safely plugged into a wall socket.
> To me, from a user point of view, "no interruptions" is equivalent to
> "no interruptions, unless critically necessary ones", which
> mathematically translates to your "fewer interruptions". To name the
> ones i can think of by myself:
> 
> * Update manager
> * Notify OSD bubbles
> * Session start sound (login sound)
> * whateve

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 17:34, frederik.nn...@gmail.com <
frederik.nn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [...] User availability status, presence status or as both..
>

 User Availability Status vs Service Status, is what i meant here
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

*sweat*

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 15:49, Matthew Paul Thomas  wrote:

>
> frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 17/12/10 15:18:
> >...
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 14:58, Matthew Paul Thomas  >...
> >> frederik.nn...@gmail.com  wrote on
> >> 16/12/10 18:42:
> >>>...
> >>> * Presence has no local effect
> >>> * Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
> >>>-> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678
> >>> * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with
> >>> Dylan's patch?)
> >>
> >> None of those are the reason.
> >
> > exactly, they merely contribute to the problem somehow, as you will
> > elaborate later in your mail..
> > i'd like to add another issue that contributes to the problem:
> > We have no "connected to the internet" indicator.
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/lucid-online-status
>
> That looks like a useful feature, but I don't understand how it's
> relevant to this discussion.
>

Because having in indicator for whether or not i'm connected to the internet
already untangles the semantic confusion of having a button called "Offline"
in the Me Menu to a great extent.
I for one believe that solving one large problem often makes many little
problems become even smaller, eventually disappearing by themselves ;)

>> The main reason is that, as you say,
> >>
> >>> Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know
> >>> Presence in IM,
> >>
> >> and no-one has ever gotten around the problem that (a) having to go
> >> online with your IM account for the purpose of being interrupted
> >> *less* often would be daft, and
> >
> > I did! ;) (perhaps a mail that never left /drafts) :
> > * put an ON|OFF toggle for IM into the MeMenu
>
> You did. But that is exactly what I meant by "(b) any design that works
> around that by making 'being online' a separate thing from being in 'do
> not disturb' mode would make IM slower and more complicated to use".
>

ok, i'm beginning to understand that now, i wish i were faster :D
In the mockups i sketched so far for a combined menu i omitted this thought
already, since i felt my theory to be impracticaL.

> * always keep Presence controls active, regardless of IM¹
>
> What use would that be? How would you avoid wasting people's time, by
> wrongly implying that it's useful for them to toggle between "brb" and
> "In a meeting" (for example) when they're not even online?
>

I'd say Notify OSD and e.g. power management or the screensaver service
would like to know if i'm busy doing something, even if that would mean i'm
only staring at the screen, or there's a standing picture being displayed.
Your point makes perfect sense, but i'm not talking about the Presence
controls in Online-only fashion, i see them as a status relevant to the
local system also.


> > * remove "Available", since it is identical with the regular Presence
> > state for IM and the Desktop Session
>
> What regular presence state?
>

that's a known bug (
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/568161 )
i'll keep looking there if i have further questions..

> * remove "Offline", since it is identical to IM = OFF
>
> That would make instant messaging state more difficult to understand in
> Ubuntu than in any other OS.
>

yes, i won't argue on that, as i came to realize while making the mockups.
It is better to have all available states together in one place, if i'm
looking for completeness.
I wasn't sure whether stopping and starting services belonged into the
launcher and dash, rather than into the status indicators..
I also can't find the policy on that anymore.. perhaps someone can help?

Only the wording/syntax is misleading, because it could easily be confused
with sending networking offline.
Someone who knows for sure that he/she is manipulatin IM Presence controls
will know which "offline" exactly is meant here.
The term "offline" as is might scare users away from ever touching anything
within this whole menu, that's why i've been trying to model my way around
the raw inclusion of this item..
Apart from that, i'm still uncertain whether to consider "offline" aka
"logged out" aka "disconnected from chat" as User availability status,
presence status or as both..


> > * allow checking and unchecking Away OR Busy
> > * make "Invisible" an extra checkbox, orthogonal to the other Presence
> > controls. [perhaps rename to "visible"]
>
> What use would that be? What's the useful distinction between Invisible
> + Available and Invisible + Away?
>

Whether i'm visible is orthogonal to whether i'm available or not.
This again is only relevant, if Presence is honored by the local system. If
not so, e.g. if the screensaver or update-manager can kick in, regardless if
i'm set to busy, not available or do not disturb, these distinctions are of
no value, as you already seem to indicate.

> This is why i mentioned invisible in the first place.
> > For those who want to appear as "busy" or "do 

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 17/12/10 15:18:
>...
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 14:58, Matthew Paul Thomas ...
>> frederik.nn...@gmail.com  wrote on
>> 16/12/10 18:42:
>>>...
>>> * Presence has no local effect
>>> * Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
>>>-> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678
>>> * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with
>>> Dylan's patch?)
>>
>> None of those are the reason.
>
> exactly, they merely contribute to the problem somehow, as you will
> elaborate later in your mail..
> i'd like to add another issue that contributes to the problem:
> We have no "connected to the internet" indicator.
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/lucid-online-status

That looks like a useful feature, but I don't understand how it's
relevant to this discussion.

>> The main reason is that, as you say,
>>
>>> Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know
>>> Presence in IM,
>>
>> and no-one has ever gotten around the problem that (a) having to go
>> online with your IM account for the purpose of being interrupted
>> *less* often would be daft, and
>
> I did! ;) (perhaps a mail that never left /drafts) :
> * put an ON|OFF toggle for IM into the MeMenu

You did. But that is exactly what I meant by "(b) any design that works
around that by making 'being online' a separate thing from being in 'do
not disturb' mode would make IM slower and more complicated to use".

> * always keep Presence controls active, regardless of IM¹

What use would that be? How would you avoid wasting people's time, by
wrongly implying that it's useful for them to toggle between "brb" and
"In a meeting" (for example) when they're not even online?

> * remove "Available", since it is identical with the regular Presence
> state for IM and the Desktop Session

What regular presence state?

> * remove "Offline", since it is identical to IM = OFF

That would make instant messaging state more difficult to understand in
Ubuntu than in any other OS.

> * allow checking and unchecking Away OR Busy
> * make "Invisible" an extra checkbox, orthogonal to the other Presence
> controls. [perhaps rename to "visible"]

What use would that be? What's the useful distinction between Invisible
+ Available and Invisible + Away?

> This is why i mentioned invisible in the first place.
> For those who want to appear as "busy" or "do not disturb" on IM, while
> keeping notifications ON (unmuted), we can leave an override interface
> in Empathy, as Contact List currently has.
> Me Menu Presence controls should remain the Master controls for all
> clients who obey the User's wish for privacy as commanded via Me Menu.

I don't understand what this has to do with privacy. What do you mean?

>...
> I need a way of guaranteeing that during a high level staff meeting, my
> presentation will absolutely not be interrupted by anything.
>...

That's not practical. We'll still interrupt you when you have only a
few minutes battery left, or when your hard disk is dying -- as well we
should.

So, any global knob would be for "fewer interruptions", not "no
interruptions". And this would make it impractical to communicate. Fewer
than what, exactly? And why would people ever *not* choose fewer
interruptions? How would this be different from saying to them, "Sorry,
the makers of Ubuntu are too incompetent to design software. Why don't
you have a go"?

>...
> ¹ allowing the user to set his desired state of Availability *before*
> activating IM allows for "going online" in a desired state, instead of
> being limited to being Available by default

Letting people switch from "Offline" to their desired state without the
IM client running would achieve exactly the same purpose, twice as fast.

- -- 
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk0jM5UACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecpxDwCdFcoAl7ZLFyQhC3QNZqa2NuPR
b74AnjSNB2hF4Oe+7vgVmy0VtMGgTKhj
=HkWz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

Hi mpt,

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 14:58, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 16/12/10 18:42:
> >...
> > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 09:48, Mark Shuttleworth  >...
> >> On 22/09/10 11:37, frederik.nn...@gmail.com
> >...
> >>> The high level concept of Silent Mode active during a Desktop session
> >>> is that the user has a simple way of enabling an disturbance-free
> >>> experience in order to be able to focus on an important task, work,
> >>> project, conversation, movie, audio or what have you.
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone started speccing this out already?
> >>
> >> I don't believe so. If you would like to do a spec, either work with
> >> MPT or I'll review it with you until it gets approval and then it can
> >> be queued for 11.10. This is LNG overdue, and I appreciate your
> >> offer of help.
> >
> > This has probably been lying around for so long, because of design
> > conflicts with how the Ayatana subsystem is currently wired.
> > * Presence has no local effect
> > * Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
> >-> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678
> > * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with
> > Dylan's patch?)
>
> None of those are the reason.
>

exactly, they merely contribute to the problem somehow, as you will
elaborate later in your mail..
i'd like to add another issue that contributes to the problem:
We have no "connected to the internet" indicator.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/lucid-online-status


> The main reason is that, as you say,
>
> > Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know Presence in
> > IM,
>
> and no-one has ever gotten around the problem that (a) having to go
> online with your IM account for the purpose of being interrupted *less*
> often would be daft, and


I did! ;) (perhaps a mail that never left /drafts) :
* put an ON|OFF toggle for IM into the MeMenu
* always keep Presence controls active, regardless of IM¹
* remove "Available", since it is identical with the regular Presence state
for IM and the Desktop Session
* remove "Offline", since it is identical to IM = OFF
* allow checking and unchecking Away OR Busy
* make "Invisible" an extra checkbox, orthogonal to the other Presence
controls. [perhaps rename to "visible"]

This is why i mentioned invisible in the first place.
For those who want to appear as "busy" or "do not disturb" on IM, while
keeping notifications ON (unmuted), we can leave an override interface in
Empathy, as Contact List currently has.
Me Menu Presence controls should remain the Master controls for all clients
who obey the User's wish for privacy as commanded via Me Menu.

(b) any design that works around that by making
> "being online" a separate thing from being in "do not disturb" mode
> would make IM slower and more complicated to use.
>

Thank You! I have been beating my head agains this one, but your above
statement confirms my initial position.
Maybe we can rename "busy" to "do not disturb", semantics.. ;)


For any design problem, I consider: Can it be solved by
> 1.  removing things?
> 2.  merging things?
> 3.  moving or renaming things?
>
> Only if none of those will work do I consider making the system more
> complex by adding things.
>

i noticed this while looking at your designs and it is the same thing i do
when i'm producing a song:
if you keep on adding instruments and tracks, you have more material to
arrange and more work in mixing later, so less redundancy is less chaos and
less complexity, hence a more orderly interface.



> For example, to solve the problem of too many interruptions:
>
> *   remove unnecessary notification bubbles from programs
>
>
> *   merge or replace notification bubbles, in programs where that's
>appropriate
>
> *   merge Skype status setting with status setting for other IM
>protocols, so you don't need to set "Do not disturb" twice
>
> *   move and/or reword the options for interruptions, to make them more
>obvious in programs like Evolution and Empathy.
>
> All those things could, and should, be done regardless of whether a
> "silent mode" is added later. And if they were done, a silent mode
> probably wouldn't be necessary.
>

i think i want to know that if i press "This button here", i'll have my
peace for sure.
I need a way of guaranteeing that during a high level staff meeting, my
presentation will absolutely not be interrupted by anything.

OTOH i agree that a professional application for business presentations will
by itself inhibit any kind of disturbances.
Still i think it is better to have such a state, which is managed and
guaranteed by the system, centrally, globally, locally and for the connected
outside world.

>...
> > other issues in the same domain:
> > * Invisible doesn't really work - it jumps to busy always
>
> That seems like a bug, not a

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Omer Akram]

Fixed in Natty more specifically telepathy-gabble ~0.10.0 ;-)

On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 19:42 +0100, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> * Invisible doesn't really work - it jumps to busy always



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote on 16/12/10 18:42:
>...
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 09:48, Mark Shuttleworth ...
>> On 22/09/10 11:37, frederik.nn...@gmail.com
>...
>>> The high level concept of Silent Mode active during a Desktop session
>>> is that the user has a simple way of enabling an disturbance-free
>>> experience in order to be able to focus on an important task, work,
>>> project, conversation, movie, audio or what have you.
>>>
>>> Has anyone started speccing this out already?
>>
>> I don't believe so. If you would like to do a spec, either work with
>> MPT or I'll review it with you until it gets approval and then it can
>> be queued for 11.10. This is LNG overdue, and I appreciate your
>> offer of help.
>
> This has probably been lying around for so long, because of design
> conflicts with how the Ayatana subsystem is currently wired.
> * Presence has no local effect
> * Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
>-> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678
> * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with
> Dylan's patch?)

None of those are the reason.

The main reason is that, as you say,

> Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know Presence in
> IM,

and no-one has ever gotten around the problem that (a) having to go
online with your IM account for the purpose of being interrupted *less*
often would be daft, and (b) any design that works around that by making
"being online" a separate thing from being in "do not disturb" mode
would make IM slower and more complicated to use.

For any design problem, I consider: Can it be solved by
1.  removing things?
2.  merging things?
3.  moving or renaming things?

Only if none of those will work do I consider making the system more
complex by adding things.

For example, to solve the problem of too many interruptions:

*   remove unnecessary notification bubbles from programs


*   merge or replace notification bubbles, in programs where that's
appropriate

*   merge Skype status setting with status setting for other IM
protocols, so you don't need to set "Do not disturb" twice

*   move and/or reword the options for interruptions, to make them more
obvious in programs like Evolution and Empathy.

All those things could, and should, be done regardless of whether a
"silent mode" is added later. And if they were done, a silent mode
probably wouldn't be necessary.

>...
> other issues in the same domain:
> * Invisible doesn't really work - it jumps to busy always

That seems like a bug, not a design.

> * the Session Menu is on the wrong side of the panel (imo)

In an ideal PC operating system, the session menu wouldn't be necessary
either. Adding an extra menu was easier than doing the necessary changes
in GDM and the kernel.

- -- 
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk0LbGgACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecrbkACfe6ufvCrq6uHdQmfb6B6SNPTW
MAkAoKfBd30Z34fO24tDq8EBJyRrtP/x
=WwrF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Dylan McCall]

With regards to presence stuff, wasn't there some talk about merging
the Me menu and the Message menu? How would that relate here?
(And, on that same topic: there's some talk right now about the
presence options disabling themselves when offline. The Me / Messages
merge would fix the big blocker for that, which is that it shouldn't
start Empathy if you use Pidgin).

Anyway… :)

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM, frederik.nn...@gmail.com
 wrote:
> …
> * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with Dylan's
> patch?)
>    -> Dylan, what's the status/bug ;) ?
> …

The branch for that feature is here:
https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~dylanmccall/notify-osd/sounds-support
You can follow the links there for the merge proposal and the bug report.

It is feature complete, I think. I'm still a little unsure about it,
but it's to the point where it just needs another set of eyes checking
things to confirm that it is as it should be (or not). Mirco said he
would get around to reviewing it fairly soon :)

The bit I'm mostly unsure about is I've thrown a lot of logic for
sound stuff into bubble_show in bubble.c. That may want to be moved to
a different place altogether. Or maybe my doubtful side should just go
away.

I was also unsure about the suppress-sound hint. I think it's
implemented as it should be, but that again could use a second
opinion. Without suppress-sound, a notification can play a really long
sound and that sound will outlive its bubble. Another bubble that also
plays a sound will play it on top of the last bubble's sound. (In the
absolute worst case that should never happen unless everyone building
apps is on drugs).
If a new bubble appears that has the suppress-sound hint (no boolean
value there; just checking if the hint exists), any other notification
sounds are killed.
I wonder if the intent of the spec was that the notification sound
block other sounds across the system, as we see in lots of smartphone
OSs. If that's the case, I expect it's a little trickier and can
probably be worked in over time.

The feature uses libCanberra, which abstracts the actual playing of
event sounds. It calls ca_gtk_play_for_widget, which also gives us
awesome positional sounds. I think it helps, but then I'm obsessed
with the idea. So, a notification sound appears to come from the top
right of the screen (in the best case), subtly directing the user
toward the bubble.
(It may sound crazy, but it works!)


Dylan

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Mark Shuttleworth]

On 16/12/10 18:42, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi SABDFL,

Yikes, that's much better in lowercase. In upper, it's more D than :-D

> This has probably been lying around for so long, because of design
> conflicts with how the Ayatana subsystem is currently wired.
> * Presence has no local effect

Well, don't think of that menu as presence, think of it as "desired
presence". I.e., if the user wants to be present, she can signal it
there, and we can make it so.

> * Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
>-> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678

Don't worry about Skype for now - get a great design, and we'll have a
word with them. Everything is possible.

> * System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with
> Dylan's patch?)
>-> Dylan, what's the status/bug ;) ?

Yeah, I'm keen to get that sorted out too :-)

> Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know Presence
> in IM, now is the time to implement it for the local system.
> I would like to discuss the above problems in order to get some
> opinions, before i am confident that i can draft a simple spec for
> "Silent Mode" aka "Do Not Disturb" aka Presence="Busy".

I'm not sure Busy is the same, but I think "Silent" and "DND" are the same.

> * Invisible doesn't really work - it jumps to busy always

Let's get a spec together, and perhaps a hero will step forward.

> * the Session Menu is on the wrong side of the panel (imo)

Fuggedaboudit ;-)




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[frederik.nn...@gmail.com]

Hi SABDFL,

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 09:48, Mark Shuttleworth  wrote:

> On 22/09/10 11:37, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
> > we can save ourselves a lot of annoyance by introducing Silent Mode
> > finally.
> > Synonyms for this use case have been "DoNotDisturb", Busy mode or
> > NotAvailable to name most of them.
> >
> > The high level concept of Silent Mode active during a Desktop session
> > is that the user has a simple way of enabling an disturbance-free
> > experience in order to be able to focus on an important task, work,
> > project, conversation, movie, audio or what have you.
> >
> > Has anyone started speccing this out already?
>
> I don't believe so. If you would like to do a spec, either work with MPT
> or I'll review it with you until it gets approval and then it can be
> queued for 11.10. This is LNG overdue, and I appreciate your offer
> of help.


This has probably been lying around for so long, because of design conflicts
with how the Ayatana subsystem is currently wired.
* Presence has no local effect
* Presence has no effect on Skype (except with Pidgin running)
   -> https://bugs.launchpad.net/indicator-me/+bug/684678
* System Sounds are not connected with notifications (perhaps with Dylan's
patch?)
   -> Dylan, what's the status/bug ;) ?

I decided to focus on these issues first, to think my way through these
problems, before i plot yet another meaningless feature.
Busy aka DoNotDisturb has been around for as long as i know Presence in IM,
now is the time to implement it for the local system.
I would like to discuss the above problems in order to get some opinions,
before i am confident that i can draft a simple spec for "Silent Mode" aka
"Do Not Disturb" aka Presence="Busy".

OTOH, if the ideas we have produced in recent threads suffice in your eyes,
i'd gladly sum them up and formalize them in a Spec draft!

other issues in the same domain:
* Invisible doesn't really work - it jumps to busy always
* the Session Menu is on the wrong side of the panel (imo)
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ayatana] Desktop Silent Mode

[Mark Shuttleworth]

On 22/09/10 11:37, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
> we can save ourselves a lot of annoyance by introducing Silent Mode
> finally.
> Synonyms for this use case have been "DoNotDisturb", Busy mode or
> NotAvailable to name most of them.
>
> The high level concept of Silent Mode active during a Desktop session
> is that the user has a simple way of enabling an disturbance-free
> experience in order to be able to focus on an important task, work,
> project, conversation, movie, audio or what have you.
>
> Has anyone started speccing this out already?

I don't believe so. If you would like to do a spec, either work with MPT
or I'll review it with you until it gets approval and then it can be
queued for 11.10. This is LNG overdue, and I appreciate your offer
of help.

Mark



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp