I agree with Thomas -- and, like Paul was saying, it does come down to focus at this stage.
It is probably too aggressive for WIAB to focus on solving the wave-email-gateway or wave/email hybrid inbox right now. That said, if someone wants to work on it outside the scope of WIAB (e.g. Wavelook), there is nothing stopping that. -Dan On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Wrobel <[email protected]> wrote: > I think once wiab is at a stage where its (relatively) easy to write > clients, all sorts of functionality like email integration or just > email-esq styling would come about naturally anyway. Its a pretty > obvious move for a developer to do if they see a need. > I'd really see the potential for a whole ecosystem of wave clients > really, giving different views to the same data and probably ending up > with some quite inventive solutions. > -Thomas > > [/2 cents] > > > ~~~~~~ > Reviews of anything, by anyone; > www.rateoholic.co.uk > Please try out my new site and give feedback :) > > > > On 23 February 2011 00:13, Paul Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree in general but that isn't what WAIB should be about. That is an > ideal > > remit for wavelook to pick up. Make their client work with WAIB. > > > > Like i said it about familiarity, with those sort of users. > > > > WAIB has enough priorities as it is. The main one begin to show that wave > works > > as a technology, and it is easy to implement. Without that different > client > > functionality is moot. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Sean Wendt <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tue, 22 February, 2011 22:27:30 > > Subject: Re: Question about Wave-Dev > > > > I think the Outlook extension is a very good example; now if we could > build > > a wave client that merges an email inbox with a wave inbox then that > would > > already be satisfactory. For sending an additional set of controls for > > setting (recipient, cc, bcc, sender, title and attachments to send) > > replacing the wave controls on would do the trick. > > Users could convert convert emails into waves and back by stripping > > incompatible elements, copying-and-pasting between emails and waves as > they > > see fit within a single client. > > Thunderbird's "Content Tabs" are nice, but still require the user to > conform > > to a different set of interface conventions for the wave client. > > > > Would extending, say, Roundcube be more difficult than writing an > standalone > > wave client for the web? Which would be the most difficult tasks for > > building a unified inbox and exchangeable controls? > > > > I am actually wondering why Google didn't do this with Gmail; they also > > popped Buzz into everyone's mail controls one idle Thursday afternoon. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 13:23, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I actually agree with you almost on every point, however, you just can't > >> fight the potential customers/adopters - and they want email-wave > >> integration. It wouldn't be a big problem if not the fundamental > >> incompatibility. It is easy to convert email into wave, but it is > >> impossible > >> to convert wave content into HTML without losing information. And it is > >> tricky to incorporate email response back into wave. > >> So as see it, there are only 2 practical solutions: > >> 1) To stretch a bit email capabilities and to cut off wave. You get a > well > >> integrated solution which is more than email, but a lot less than Wave. > >> 2) Leave Wave as is, cut of email - make it just a pluggable wave > >> extension. > >> It wouldn't allow full email capabilities but would provide just enough > to > >> be able to send/receive emails with not really convenient user > interface. > >> It > >> would require to relay on Wave for features like calendar, contacts > etc.. > >> and it wouldn't be as user friendly as integrated email solution. > >> I guess that both options will find their uses and users. But, imho, it > >> should be clear, that solutions of the first kind , most probably will > be > >> provided by 3-rd parties and not by the WIAB community. > >> 2011/2/22 Paul Thomas <[email protected]> > >> > >> > Personally I think SMTP is the wrong protocol for Wave. I know that > Chris > >> > argues > >> > that it is essential for enterprise, I actually disagree.The > wave/email > >> > analogy > >> > was always a false one. Currently there is no mature wave services. I > >> know > >> > that > >> > frustrates some people, but frankly it has little to do with lack of > >> email > >> > integration. Once it is stable there will be little reason to make it > >> > analogous > >> > to email. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > There is a big difference between integrating wave technology in any > >> client > >> > be > >> > it email or whatever and merging the two technologies, which I think > will > >> > be a > >> > red headed step child.It is kind of like trying to make phone and > email > >> > analogous, sure there are ways of bridging the gap but they are > clearly > >> not > >> > the > >> > same. You can help streamline forms of communication, like facebook is > >> > doing. > >> > That gives you a step gap. > >> > > >> > > >> > If wave itself isn't useful to enterprise, no attempts at making it > like > >> > email > >> > is going to make it more useful than email. The primary aim of WAIB is > to > >> > be > >> > easy to set up and useful. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Google was slow to open up Wave to open up wave to the open source > >> > community. > >> > Some people were pissed off by that more than others, and people got > >> > different > >> > ideas. It is actually quite a tough nut to crack. You can't rush the > >> early > >> > stages. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ---- > >> > From: Chris Harvey <[email protected]> > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > Sent: Tue, 22 February, 2011 9:12:35 > >> > Subject: Re: Question about Wave-Dev > >> > > >> > | Does a more elaborated attempt for email integration with wave > exist? > >> > > >> > Yes. The iotaWave project is predicated on the notion that wave and > eMail > >> > *must* be tightly integrated for wave to make a significant impact on > the > >> > enterprise market. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Chris > >> > the wave practice <http://thewavepractice.com> > >> > iotawave.org > >> > Singapore > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
