Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On Sun Sep 25 2011 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have rather low > > priority on my current BBDB agenda. Currently, I consider a proper > > BBDB release more important. > > Being able to (more or less) directly edit the *BBDB* buffer would > be great. "Direct editing" maybe similar to wdired-mode could be, indeed, a great thing. -- Yet as I said: I'll postpone such dreams till BBDB 3 has been released. Roland -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On Mon Sep 26 2011 Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> Why not have separate minibuffer prompts for surname and given name?
>
> Many of my records are for Chinese people. Right now I can't be bothered
> separating out the characters for surname and given name, and usually
> they all get lumped into whatever default bbdb picks for names with no
> spaces. Separate prompts for surname and given name would solve this
> (and the surname prompt could say " or organization name", something
> like that).
>
> Or, if a syntax for splitting is introduced, perhaps it could indicate
> which side is the surname and which the given name, to make it easier to
> create records for cultures where surname comes first. I'm not bothered
> that the resulting name is displayed "backwards" (given name first), but
> it would be great if entry were made easier.
>
> My random suggestion: use "{" or "}" for the separator. The surname is
> the part that's "inside" the bracket. So:
>
> Eric{Abrahamsen
> }
> {Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant
> Bartók}Béla
>
> On second thought, if you did it this way, BBDB could "learn" from the
> parsing the proper display order of the name, and store that as a
> boolean with the name itself. Parsing would be a little more
> complicated, but this would provide for much more flexible
> customization.
Nice thoughts, thank you!
Being a lazy person when it comes to typing, I'd prefer for myself
to have one prompt for the full name. But this could be made
customizable, such that one can also get two prompts for first and
last name. And if the customizable default for entering names was
"full-name", the bracket separator could be used for more
flexibility.
Controlling the display order via the bracket scheme is also a neat
idea. The flag could also be used if first and last name are entered
separately. What would be a convenient way to control the value of
this flag when entering the name in the latter way?
Roland
--
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1
___
bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
>> A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from >> scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what >> customize is using. > I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have rather low > priority on my current BBDB agenda. Currently, I consider a proper > BBDB release more important. Being able to (more or less) directly edit the *BBDB* buffer would be great. Stefan -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On Mon, Sep 26 2011, Roland Winkler wrote:
> On Sun Sep 25 2011 Roland Winkler wrote:
>> A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from
>> scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what
>> customize is using.
>
> I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have rather low
> priority on my current BBDB agenda. Currently, I consider a proper
> BBDB release more important.
>
>> A simple solution would be that if the user enters a name string
>> that contains a special character such as "%" as separator, then
>> this defines the first and last name. So then you would have to
>> enter the name as "%Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant". Would this be
>> useful?
>
> Such a scheme, while not perfect, could provide a reasonable
> solution till someone finds the time to implement a fancier scheme.
> (This scheme would only require a few lines of new code.)
>
> Yet in any case: suggestions for better schemes are always welcome.
Why not have separate minibuffer prompts for surname and given name?
Many of my records are for Chinese people. Right now I can't be bothered
separating out the characters for surname and given name, and usually
they all get lumped into whatever default bbdb picks for names with no
spaces. Separate prompts for surname and given name would solve this
(and the surname prompt could say "…or organization name", something
like that).
Or, if a syntax for splitting is introduced, perhaps it could indicate
which side is the surname and which the given name, to make it easier to
create records for cultures where surname comes first. I'm not bothered
that the resulting name is displayed "backwards" (given name first), but
it would be great if entry were made easier.
My random suggestion: use "{" or "}" for the separator. The surname is
the part that's "inside" the bracket. So:
Eric{Abrahamsen
王}小波
{Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant
Bartók}Béla
On second thought, if you did it this way, BBDB could "learn" from the
parsing the proper display order of the name, and store that as a
boolean with the name itself. Parsing would be a little more
complicated, but this would provide for much more flexible
customization.
Two cents,
Eric
--
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1
___
bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On Sun Sep 25 2011 Roland Winkler wrote: > A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from > scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what > customize is using. I should add: Such a rather substantial change would have rather low priority on my current BBDB agenda. Currently, I consider a proper BBDB release more important. > A simple solution would be that if the user enters a name string > that contains a special character such as "%" as separator, then > this defines the first and last name. So then you would have to > enter the name as "%Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant". Would this be > useful? Such a scheme, while not perfect, could provide a reasonable solution till someone finds the time to implement a fancier scheme. (This scheme would only require a few lines of new code.) Yet in any case: suggestions for better schemes are always welcome. Roland -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On Sun Sep 25 2011 Leo wrote: > I am fine with anything that allows one to enter organisation-only > records nicely. For example, dividing "Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant" > into firstname and lastname is not nice. We should get rid of that. Any suggestions what to do? It seems that again this is a somewhat separate problem. I mean, by default BBDB uses bbdb-divide-name to divide a name into first and last name. If a record already exists, you can call bbdb-record-edit-name with a prefix arg. This way you can edit the first and last name separately so that you get for sure what you want. But this requires that the record already exists. There should also be a mechanism to do such a thing in the first place when the record is created. (There will always be unusual names where bbdb-divide-name is bound to fail.) If a record is created "by hand" using bbdb-create, this command is too complex for a prefix arg. (It's been using a prefix arg, but in general it's rather confusing which part of the record creation should be modified because of the prefix arg.) A simple solution would be that if the user enters a name string that contains a special character such as "%" as separator, then this defines the first and last name. So then you would have to enter the name as "%Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant". Would this be useful? A much fancier solution would be to reimplement bbdb-create from scratch by using something like a form to fill, similar to what customize is using. This could be done in a much more transparent way than the current minibuffer-based approach. Yet I do not know yet how to deal with things like the street part of an address. The "customize" approach of adding lines appears a bit clumsy to me if one wanted to enter more records; but maybe this would be just a matter of getting used to such a scheme. A similar approach could also be used for editing records in a more transparent way... Roland -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: [PATCH] Better support for organisation-only records
On 2011-09-24 03:27 +0800, Roland Winkler wrote: > When I looked at this once more I thought that this could be > something more people might like to use so that it could become part > of the "BBDB trunk". Namely: > > There could be an optional note field `name-face' similar to > `creation-date' and `timestamp'. This note field could either > directly hold the name of a face that font-lock will use for > highlighting the name of a record. Or the value of name-face could > be a key which gets translated to a face via something like > `bbdb-name-face-alist'. (Even both of these schemes could exist in > parallel.) I am fine with anything that allows one to enter organisation-only records nicely. For example, dividing "Lucky Star Buffet Restaurant" into firstname and lastname is not nice. We should get rid of that. Leo -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
