[dev] [commits] Horde branch imp_6_2 updated. 932c9345aff0d5b43cafb025c05447d8a632cc54

[Jan Schneider]

Zitat von Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:

> Zitat von Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>
>> Quoting Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:
>>
>>> commit 932c9345aff0d5b43cafb025c05447d8a632cc54
>>> Author: Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>
>>> Date:   Tue Oct 15 16:58:01 2013 +0200
>>>
>>>  Display signature in compose view.
>>>
>>>  Final position, collapsibility and styling is open to discussion and not
>>>  decided yet. But the functionality is there.
>>>
>>> imp/docs/CHANGES                             |    1 +
>>> imp/js/compose-base.js                       |   13 +++++++++++++
>>> imp/js/compose-dimp.js                       |    5 ++++-
>>> imp/js/compose.js                            |    3 +++
>>> imp/lib/Compose/Ui.php                       |   26  
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> imp/package.xml                              |    1 +
>>> imp/templates/basic/compose/compose.html.php |    9 +++++++++
>>> imp/templates/dynamic/compose.html.php       |    6 ++++++
>>> imp/themes/default/screen.css                |    9 ++++++++-
>>> 9 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> http://github.com/horde/horde/commit/932c9345aff0d5b43cafb025c05447d8a632cc54
>>> http://git.horde.org/horde-git/-/commit/932c9345aff0d5b43cafb025c05447d8a632cc54
>>
>> You knew this was coming :)
>
> I did. :)
>
>> 1. This must be configurable.  Default will be the same as IMP 6.1  
>> (i.e. no display).
>> 2. Related to number 1 - this must not be shown if the user doesn't  
>> have any signatures.
>> 3. This makes much more sense at the bottom of the page.  Seems to  
>> me like it should be collapsed by default (i.e. a simple "Click to  
>> view signature" link - preference as to collapsed state). Clicking  
>> opens up a small (4 lines?) window to view.
>
> Done.
>
>> 4. No need to load signature pane contents unless/until it is visible.
>
> Doesn't make much sense to me. The signatures are only loaded once  
> per window, and only if the user opts to show them at all. The extra  
> hassle of requesting the signature via ajax and maintaining the code  
> isn't justified by the small (or bigger with some corporate html  
> signatures) initial payload increase IMO.
>
>> 5. I would think that if we are going to allow viewing of the  
>> signature, we might as well make the damn thing editable.  Although  
>> that would be a pain when it comes to HTML signature... due to the  
>> need for an entirely separate editor instance.  The compromise is  
>> probably a button that transfers the signature to the message body,  
>> removes the signature pane, and marks the message as having the  
>> signature added so it is not re-added in case of draft/restore.
>
> Let's see what the user response is with the current solution is.  
> OTOH making this editable would make the sponsor happy, so I might  
> look into this later.

Having looked more at this, the only viable solution is what you  
outlined as a compromise. Otherwise, edited signatures would be prone  
to get lost (saving drafts, switching modes). A button to transfer the  
signature to the buttons sounds VERY unintuitive and awkward usability  
to me though.

-- 
Jan Schneider
The Horde Project
http://www.horde.org/