[Design] Re: [Please review] Updates to Stamping, aka Edit/Update Spec

[Brian Kirsch]

On Feb 20, 2007, at 10:17 AM, Mimi Yin wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>
> I'm not sure I understand. Why does the user need to understand  
> this? You asked if there was a way to avoid sending an EIML  
> attachment with every single Chandler mail? This is just a way to  
> do that, but it's not really an end-user facing feature.

Hi Mimi,
In order to participate in an Edit / Update workflow EIML must be  
generated from the first sent message. Thus the user has to know that  
he or she must have a different from then sent by to generate that  
first EIML record. Otherwise, that email will never be able to  
participate in a Edit / Update workflow. I think this would lead to  
confusion by users.

Yes, I am looking for ways technically to prevent having to generate  
EIML for every message sent from Chandler. And yes your suggestion  
would limit the sending of EIML but again I am concerned that to the  
user it will not be clear that entering a different from is the way  
to trigger the start of the Edit / Update workflow.

Does that make sense?
-Brian


>
> Mimi
>
> On Feb 20, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Brian Kirsch wrote:
>
>> Hi Mimi,
>>> 1. If Sender of the message (Send as: byline field) is not the  
>>> same as the From: field, then the message requires an EIML  
>>> attachment.
>>>
>>
>> This concerns me. Although from a technical standpoint this is  
>> doable I am worried that users will not
>> understand that the from has to be different to start a Edit /  
>> Update work-flow.
>>
>> Does anyone else think this might be confusing?
>>
>> -Brian
>>
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design