-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:23:02 -0700, Nick Andriash wrote:
>> If a mailto link is invoked externally, then it's quite obvious that
>> the user wants the message addressed only to the mailto address.
NA> That is not any more obvious than when clicking a MailTo link in a
NA> message. Where they are found has nothing to do with their intent,
NA> and therefore they should be treated alike.
For you they don't, but for others they may be different. I sited an
example before. Let me give you another:
Say for arguments sake, you and another person run a tech support
system. You send a copy of all outgoing tech support messages to each
other. You both thankfully use TB! <g> and manage the tech support
messages from a single folder with special templates defined. You decide
to send a copy of all messages to your associate by including
%To="<associates address>" in all templates. You now get a tech support
message with the author giving a mailto link for replies. You double
click the link and your template is inappropriately overruled by the
assumption that you want the message addressed only to the address
defined in the mailto link. Gonk!
Can you provide a practical example of why someone would want a message
automatically addressed to some(one|where) else when using a maito link
in an external location, like a browser or an 'about' pop-up box? It
would seem natural that you'd want the message addressed only to the
address defined in the mailto link, and furthermore, the message
shouldn't be linked to a particular folders templates. Earlier in TB!'s
development, there was a big, unified complaint about external mailto
links being inappropriately associated with folder templates. I had to
be checking which folder was selected when invoking an external mailto
link. Sometimes I had to start TB! prior to invoking the mailto link
just to check this. This is why the account option "This account is the
default for 'mailto' URL's" was introduced.
>> IOW's, I agree with Marck that it's not a bug but only TB! doing as the
>> user instructs.
NA> Alright, I'll agree that it may not be a 'bug', but this is a case
NA> where TB! *is* assuming what the User wants,
I disagree and am of the opinion that TB! is doing exactly what the user
asks. You define the %To macro, so TB! faithfully honours it.
NA> simply by the way it handles MailTo's in two different
NA> circumstances.
Different circumstances indeed and they should be treated differently.
IMHO, external mailto links shouldn't be associated with folders and
their templates at all. There are some who'd like to link them to
folders so the option is there.
NA> If TB! treated message MailTo's the same way it handles external
NA> one's,
Once you're working within a folder, the folder templates will apply.
No assumptions. :-) So take another scenario. You have a folder for a
friend with templates defined:
Tutsy is his pet name that you decide to use for him instead of his real
name. Your new message template goes like this:
Hello Tutsy,
%Cursor
- --
Later, Nick
%Cookie="path to file containing humourous statements"
%To="Jasper Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
Your friend provides a mailto link for technical support and you double
click it. What should TB! do now? I'm sure you wouldn't want only the
%To macro omitted, right. In fact, I'm sure you wouldn't want to use the
entire template.
So, I've given two examples where TB! would be wrongfully assuming that
the %To macro should be ignored when invoking a mailto link in a message
within the folder itself, and I've given an example where you're concern
would not only be with the %To macro not being ignored when invoking the
mailto link, but in fact the entire template! Proposing that TB! should
automatically exclude or include components of templates in particular
situations without the user explicitly deciding this opens a can of
worms.
NA>>> I remember reading where Allie experimented by associating his AB
NA>>> with an LDAP Server, and ended up completely losing his AB if I'm
NA>>> not mistaken.
>> But again, this has nothing to do with using address book templates.
NA> No, I realize that... what we were talking about, was how finicky
NA> the AB can be at times, potentially affecting the AB Templates.
I'm a skeptic on the claim that the AB is finicky. :-)
- --
A. Curtis Martin..
Moderator TBUDL/TBBETA | PGP Key ID: 0xEE079937
PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=SendAlliePGPKey
- ---
** "Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things. "
________________________________________________________
Using TB! v1.47 Beta/7 (S/N CCA4F9B8) «» Win2k Pro SP1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Digitally signed for sender verification.
iQA/AwUBOe6TYfAXeSHuB5k3EQIQtwCgsvykCV0oVfE2a9udAXls04dUxd0An29E
GsegORMq+SrsEsGltu6Q/XBz
=kL0J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
