unity-design team mailing list archive

[mac_v <drkvi-a@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 16:45 -0400, Celeste Lyn Paul wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Mark
> Shuttleworth<mark.shuttleworth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Stuart Langridge wrote:
> >
> > Am I missing something here? If Pidgin's not running then by definition
> > I can't have any messages in it. Is the messaging menu just another
> > applications menu but only containing apps which are capable of
> > generating messages? That seems not all that useful to me, unless I've
> > completely misunderstood the purpose of it.
> >
> >
> > I'll go out on a limb and say that's because y ou are one of the special and
> > wonderful breed of people who know what's running on your computer. You may
> > even, like me, have your favourite ps incantation to reassure you on the
> > subject.
> >
> > The idea the messaging-menu-launching capability is built on is that users
> > tend to go there to see if they have messages first, and if they don't see
> > anything, they don't know if it's because "the thing is not running".
> > Switching and launching are a blurred experience for many people.
> 
> So this is all very confusing because I don't think anyone has
> responded about the future purpose of the message indicator.
> 
> Currently this how I would expect it to work: The message indicator
> will indicate if there is a message there. If there are no messages,
> there is no indication. No reason to go to the message indicator. No
> reason to go there to launch an application. If there is a message
> there, then you go to the message indicator and it tells you what
> messages you missed. If you missed a message, want to see more about
> it, you click on the message item and it takes you to where you need
> to be. If the application is running, then you go to the app or
> whatever. If there is a message for an application *not* running,
> clicking on the message item will launch the application and load the
> message. The latter is an acceptable shortcut to an application
> because it is simply supporting the primary activity of the message
> indicator: helping users view missed messages, regardless if the
> application/service is running.
> 
> If an application has *no* messages, there should be no reference to
> that application anywhere in the message indicator, regardless if it
> is running or not. This includes shortcuts to launch applications. But
> the v2 plans for the message indicator wants to provide a shortcut to
> applications, regardless if they are running and if they have
> messages. Why do users need this? All the message indicator should do
> is support messages.
> 

The real question is "Why not?" why shouldn't it behave as a launcher
too!

They've already accepted that 
it will be allowed to blacklist/remove apps from the menu , 
and if no app is using the menu , the icon wont be shown. 
also that the menu would only have limited number of entries and not be
a comprehensive status dashboard. 
So, now it doesnt hurt anyone who doesnt want to use it and wouldnt spam
the menu!

I dont see any reason to prevent this new function just because it wasnt
the "initial goal" !
So are apps never supposed to add new functions which were not the
initial goal?

Anyone subscribed to the wiki page would realize that the messaging menu
specs are changed almost every other day[in the past couple of weeks].
They seem to be testing it and trying to find a proper solution! I think
if we are a *little patient* the plans would become clear,eventually.

I *really* [cant stress this enough] like the idea of messaging-menu +
launching capability , this is a nice idea and hope they dont backtrack
because of a few questions of this not being the "initial goal" .


-- 
Cheers,
mac_v