[Design] Stamping, Communications and the Ecosystem

[Mimi Yin]

Hi Jeffrey, see in-line

On Jul 31, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Jeffrey Harris wrote:
>> ---+++C the Chandler User, Not-sharing
>>    * C can see the invitation in their Chandler, in the collection  
>> they
>> share with A as soon as A has created the item and a sync happens.  
>> The
>> invitation is auto-triaged in C's Dashboard to Later, because it  
>> is an
>> invitation for an event scheduled in the future.
>
> Hmm.  If C isn't sharing, I think the stuff about sharing with A is
> erroneous here.

Oh, good catch. I got B and C mixed up. The stuff for C should really  
be for B and vice versa.

>
>>    * When A sends the invitation, C receives the invitation in their
>> email client; AND
>>    * C receives the invitation item pops into the NOW section of C's
>> Dashboard
>>    * C can reply to the email in their email client; OR
>>    * C edits the item
>>    * C updates the item
>>
>>    * A receives the update in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread; AND
>>    * A receives the update to the original invitation item in their
>> Chandler / Dashboard NOW section
>>    * B receives the update in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread; AND
>>    * B receives the update to the original invitation item in their
>> Chandler / Dashboard NOW section
>>    * C receives the update in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread
>>    * D receives the update in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread;  D can click on a URL ticket to view / edit the  
>> item on
>> Scooby
>>    * E receives the update in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread
>
> Does Chandler somehow know that D is a Scooby user but E never uses
> Scooby?  I've been assuming we'd just send them both a Scooby URL, is
> that a reasonably assumption?

I think this is basically the how many URLs discussion that we've  
been having on the Cosmo-dev list. The ideal proposal from a design  
perspective is that there is a single URL that works for both  
directing people to the Scooby UI and/or subscribing to shares via  
Chandler. http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/cosmo-dev/2006- 
June/000893.html

>
> [snip]
>
>> ---+++E the Email client User
>>
>>    * E receives the invitation in their email client
>>    * E can reply to the email in their client
>>
>>    * A receives the reply in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread; AND
>>    * A receives the reply to the original invitation item in their
>> Chandler / Dashboard NOW section as a separate email in the same  
>> thread
>>    * B receives the reply in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread; AND
>>    * B receives the reply to the original invitation item in their
>> Chandler / Dashboard NOW section as a separate email in the same  
>> thread
>>    * C receives the reply in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread; AND
>>    * C receives the reply to the original invitation item in their
>> Chandler / Dashboard NOW section as a separate email in the same  
>> thread
>>    * D receives the reply in their email client as a separate  
>> email in
>> the same thread
>
>
> Are you hoping everyone who responds will remember to use reply-to- 
> all?
>  Many users (myself lamentably included) occasionally forget to use
> reply-to-all when they intend to.

Nope. Just sketching out what should happen if they do. We can't  
really control it if they don't and they may be replying only to the  
sender on purpose.

> If we end up sending different tickets (and thus different  
> messages) to
> different users, reply-to-all isn't even an option, there will  
> likely be
> multiple emails sent, with different addressees.  That's really an
> argument against per-user tickets, in my mind.
> We could put multiple recipients in the reply-to field, so at least  
> the
> first response from a non-Chandler user would probably go to all the
> original recipients (assuming their mail client handles multiple
> reply-to addressees, I have no idea how common that is, Thunderbird
> supports it).  Unfortunately ad-hoc reply-to fields aren't sticky,  
> so if
> E replied to all, some other email user might just reply to E  
> instead of
> sending it to everyone else.  I think no one uses this feature because
> it's likely to confuse more than help.

Oh I see. I don't foresee per user tickets in the Beta timeframe. It  
doesn't seem to be an idea that's gaining any traction.

>
> Perhaps this isn't worth worrying about, but I thought I'd point out
> that we shouldn't assume email responses will reliably propagate to  
> the
> right people.  The same is true for email by itself, and obviously the
> world goes on.

Okay, good to raise a flag.