[Design] [Sum] April 3-9

[Sheila Mooney]

Design

Mimi posted regarding a follow-up issue during the stamping  
discussions about possible user confusion when seeing traditional  
From: and To: fields on an event stamped as a email in order to  
communicate this event to others and what happens when we give the  
user the ability to change these fields as this event/communication  
involves. Keeping the fields generic rather than changing them to  
Organizer: and Attendees: would give the user more flexibility to not  
have to think about who the organizer and attendees are. We often  
want to confer about a meeting/event before it's setup up and there  
could be some back and forth chatter before it's actually send out to  
the intended group of people. In other cases, an item on our calendar  
we communicate to others may not always have an organizer/attendees  
(ie: PTO day). Mimi also points that users will really only encounter  
this use case (potential confusion) when they have broken through the  
email mental model and are adopting Chandler's new way of thinking  
about information items anyway.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004486.html

Last call for handling re-importing and re-subscribing to a trashed  
item. The issue here is that if we have items in the trash, exporting  
this calendar, then re-importing will not preserve the item(s), that  
may have been in the trash. They will be put back in their original  
collections.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004485.html

Mimi posted regarding another issue that came up during the stamping  
discussions. If I stamp an event as a mail and send it to person A,  
what do I do if I want to send it to person B and be able to easily  
see two different conversation threads about the same event.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004502.html

Mimi sent out a proposal for the visual modifications we want to make  
in the markup bar for 0.7.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004504.html

Scooby

None

Dogfood:

In response to reading the latest sharing spec, Jim Sowers posted a  
use case for the ability to selectively sync a particular type of  
item (ie: contacts, email). Due to the fact that we do not have  
background sync working, he was concerned about future performance.  
Sheila responded to the email with the related plan for 0.7.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-March/004469.html

Mitch posted some dogfood feedback about the visual separation of  
events when you have a very full calendar with many back-to-back 30  
and 60 min meetings. This stacking in combination with the D-shaped  
lozenge on the left hand side makes it difficult to see when one  
event starts and the other begins.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004488.html

Sheila posted a status on picking the dogfood performance targets for  
0.7. We had conducted a survey of calendar and task list sizes and  
have decided on a 1500 event calendar and 500 item task list to use  
as targets. The next step is to review the current scenarios and  
modify the list as appropriate.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004491.html

Ted posted an announcement about DCamp in mid-May.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-April/004489.html

The discussion of Cut/Copy and Paste keyboard shortcuts continues.  
Summary of thread to follow separately.

Philippe sent out his free-busy ticket.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/attachments/20060412/a994d7c9/attachment.html