[dev] Forward message with separate attachments

[Chuck Hagenbuch]

Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:

> Quoting Gonçalo Queirós <goncalo.queiros at portugalmail.net>:
>
>> On 03/30/2011 06:07 AM, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
>>> Except my user expectation is different.  Forward to me means to send
>>> the entire message to a new set of users.
>>
>> I understand your point, but actually what is true is that end users are
>> used to this behavior, and while in some features you can explain them
>> that the changes is for the better, it doesn't make sense to a user
>> (that was used to choose what attachments to forward) to save all
>> attachments to his pc, to attach them latter to the message.
>
> Essentially what you just said is that *my* opinion doesn't matter.   
> You claim that "end users" believe it should be another way.  But  
> I'm an end user.  And I feel that the current way is better.  Just  
> because some users complain doesn't mean that the old way is  
> automatically better.  Because I guarantee a good portion of "end  
> users" find the new behavior better.
>
>> I believe the behavior you described with the real world example is
>> perfect, but i think that in real world sometimes you receive documents
>> that you edit only small parts. It would be fun to have to type all the
>> work again, just to edit those parts, if you know what i mean.
>
> As I mentioned, my issue is with calling this behavior "forwarding".  
>  Because it isn't.  Calling it forwarding is confusing.  It **may**  
> not be confusing for someone who has used IMP 4 and/or another email  
> client that does the same thing.  But a user may be using IMP for  
> the first time, so we need to implement this correctly, not because  
> of what has done in the past.

There's no objective truth here, just opinions. I would like to see if  
there's evidence for end users (and yes, both you and I are end users,  
but we're not *average* end users) preferring one or the other.

-chuck