[horde] Signature

[Vilius Šumskas]

Tuesday, November 6, 2012, 11:25:34 PM, you wrote:

> my 2 cents..

> ----- Nachricht von Vilius Šumskas <vilius at lnk.lt> ---------
>    Datum: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:14:27 +0200
>      Von: Vilius Šumskas <vilius at lnk.lt>
> Betreff: Re: [horde] Signature
>       An: horde at lists.horde.org


>> Sveiki,
>>
>> Tuesday, November 6, 2012, 10:58:36 PM, you wrote:
>>
>>> On 6 November 2012 14:26, Vilius Šumskas <vilius at lnk.lt> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Tuesday, November 6, 2012, 9:13:00 PM, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6 November 2012 13:51, Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Quoting Jens Grüntjes <jens.gruentjes at ebira.de>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Zitat von Ole Wolf <wolf at blazingangles.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Quoting Andreas Mauser <andreas at mauser.info>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the idea. It seems to be the only workaround(?) for now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any chance that there will be a checkbox in the future to  
>>>>>>>>> set/unset the
>>>>>>>>> signature?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure whether I'd consider it a workaround or something  
>>>>>>>> worthy of
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> checkbox. Most email clients that I've used simply append the signature
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the compose window so you could delete it if necessary; IMP used to do
>>>>>>>> that, too, so it's probably a design decision. In any event, I  
>>>>>>>> don't feel
>>>>>>>> entirely comfortable about the implied inclusion of the signature that
>>>>>>>> IMP
>>>>>>>> H5 applies. I would prefer to see what's being sent in the email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would also prefer to be able to choose whether I want the signature an
>>>>>>> what signature I want. Should one make an enhancement on  
>>>>>>> bugs.horde.org for
>>>>>>> that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No - it's not happening ever.  This has already been discussed  
>>>>>> and rejected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to send a message without signatures, set-up a separate
>>>>>> identity.
>>>>
>>>>> In principle I agree with you - in fact, I think signatures are on the
>>>>> whole completely useless and irrelevant and as much sense as stupid
>>>>> legal disclaimers.
>>>>
>>>>> However, the world functions on a certain amount of perception - and
>>>>> therefore some people require a signature to believe in the
>>>>> professionalism or some other quality of the sender.  Thus, whilst new
>>>>> messages sometimes require a signature I have yet to see the case
>>>>> where a signature is required or needed on a reply (except by people
>>>>> too simple to understand the concept or full of their own importance).
>>>>
>>>>> I've yet to win a design or functionality argument with any member of
>>>>> the Horde team, so I don't expect to win this one, but a the ideal
>>>>> solution for me as an administrator is a check box (either ticked or
>>>>> not ticked by default in the compose preferences) that inserts or
>>>>> removes the signature would be the perfect solution.
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>> As  a  person  using signatures extensively I must oppose this at some
>>>> level.
>>>>
>>>> The  signatures are not only used in professional cases. The signature
>>>> can  be  as short as one word. In your case for example it is "Simon".
>>>> But it *is* signature.
>>>>
>>>> If you need to enable/disable signature per message basis, just create
>>>> two  profiles,  one  with  signature  and  another  without. Switching
>>>> profiles is as fast as clicking a checkbox.
>>>>
>>>> What  other  useful feature I see from the discussion is that it would
>>>> be  great  to  have  one  profile for New Messages and one profile for
>>>> Replies/Forwards.   This   way   all   new  messages  will  have  full
>>>> professional signature and replies just simple "Simon".
>>
>>
>>> The problem with this approach is that Horde uses identities for
>>> everything - and that can quickly add up.  You have listed 5 use cases
>>> already, now add another email address/profile and you have 10,  All I
>>
>> This is unrelated problem. If you say that profiles should be separate
>> from  signatures,  then  yes,  that  could  be useful addition in some
>> *edge* cases.

> In our case it's like Simon said.

>>> am saying - given my opposition to signatures anyway - is that there
>>> should be a better more streamlined way to do this.  With AJAX we have
>>> the ability to make make this very slick.  One check-box to add or
>>> remove a signature, and a drop-down (that appears when the box is
>>> checked) to allow the selection of which signature, and the users are
>>> happy, and the admin are happy.  Using identities to do this seems
>>> like a clever idea for Horde3, but I think we can and should be doing
>>> better in Horde5.
>>
>> In  theory, there should be no cases where you don't need a signature at
>> all.   Just   make  "Simon"  a  default  one  and  there, you have it,
>> all new emails with simple "no signature" writing.

> I do not fully agree. Different Users, different use cases. Sales  
> users e.g. would use different signatures for different customers,  
> regarding events for example, where partners don't receive the same  
> signature 'subtitle' as end customers do. But that's just one of many.
> And some time I just don't want a signature to be attached, see this  
> mailing list (using different profile with NO signature...)

And that's just bad manners IMHO.

> Adding such use cases to the sum of email profiles can also be annoying.
> I still would like to see a dropdown menu, where I can choose from my
> different pre-designed signatures - like MS Outlook has. I feel  
> improving signatures can be an additional and good business driver for
> Horde, helping users doing their work done (as fast as possible, but  
> not faster)

Current  IMP  implementation  from  MS Outlook differs only if you are
using  different  E-Mail/Name  for  different  customers. If not, it's
still the same drop-down. I know, because I use both and I don't see a
difference.

-- 
 Vilius