unity-design team mailing list archive

[Conscious User <conscioususer@xxxxxxx>]

> > Part of messagING, as in "using an instant messenger", but not
> > part of messagES, as in "an usual action when sending or
> > receiving messages". The Message Menu deals with messagES.
> 
> The name is Messaging Menu: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MessagingMenu/
> So I think you partly misunderstood its function.

Oh, I didn't have the intention to imply "if it's in the name,
it's how it is". I just used the ING vs. ES difference to
emphasize my point. It was kinda useless and came out wrong,
sorry, ignore it. :)

The important part was the part actually the part in quotes.
(using instant messenger vs. dealing with messages)

> Corner cases concern less used functions, or infrequent combinations
> of more used functions. 
> I'm talking about well-known functions and most usual combinations of
> them.

The combination thing is more or less my point: changing status is
common, and responding to messages is common, what I don't think
it's common is doing *both* as a reaction to a message (the
"annoying message" scenario you brought up).

> Moreover, all other interfaces similar to Ubuntu indicator (like dock
> in Mac OS X) work with the behavior that I will.
> There is a reason, I think. The reason is usability and simplicity.
> Users expect this, IMHO.

But they do this under a application-oriented intention...

> From Messaging Menu, you can receive broadcast messages.
(..)
> I can receive a personal or broadcast message from the Messaging Menu,
> and I can send a broadcast message from MeMenu. 

A behavior I don't particularly agree with. I agree with
receiving broadcasts in the messaging menu, but only if
they are directed at you (thus, messages).

I actually wanted to discuss this with the Gwibber
developers, because it seems particularly fuzzy. For
example, a broadcast is not considered important
enough to change the messaging menu icon.

> I cite:
> 
> Recommended behavior for feed readers and microblogging clients
> 
> A feed reader or microblogging client should register itself when you
> add any feeds or accounts, and unregister itself when you remove the
> last feed or account. It should also provide a “Show {Name of Program}
> in the messaging menu” checkbox in its settings.
> 
> For the purpose of the messaging menu, a new message is an unread item
> that the program discovered since the last time you (a) performed any
> action in the program or (b) selected the corresponding item in the
> messaging menu. Whether an item is important enough to include in the
> messaging menu may be configurable within the program.
> 
> A feed reader should provide one message source item for each feed
> that contains new messages. A microblogging client should provide one
> message source item for each account that contains new messages. (It
> should do this for all relevant feeds or accounts even though a
> maximum of six will be shown, because that maximum may change in the
> future.)"
> 
> Messaging Menu was designed for purposes wider than those that you
> mentioned.

And none of them include status changing, which is the core of
my point. :)

> To assign MeMenu to broadcasts and Messaging Menu to 1-to-1 messages
> is not in specifications.

You are missing my point. I never said that it was formally
in the specifications, I was just giving you the logic that
you said it didn't exist.

Re-reading my previous email, there was an epic fail in my
part in not making it clear that I wasn't defending the
developers' point of view (specially because I am not one),
but my own. My intention was disagreeing with you flat-out
saying there's no logical reason, because I see one.

Sorry for the confusion.

> Moreover: there is a very slight difference between broadcasts and
> 1-to-1 messages. Pretty each 1-to-1 instant messenger has a broadcast
> function (status, presence) and each social network has 1-to-1 chat.
> So I think a strong separation isn't in the minds of users, even in
> the mind of facebook/twitter/identi.ca/msn/jabber/sip developers and
> even less in the specification of Ubuntu indicators.

That's a very interesting point of view, because a lot of
people agree that the text field in the Me Menu should be
for IM custom status. I personally think an experiment
where it would do *both* would be very interesting.

> You see, Mark admits the (partial) inconsistency and Mark know well
> what is MeMenu and Messaging Menu.

> Frankly, you have a your own idea of them, that is slighty different
> from specifications.
> 
> I assume specifications exist and I read them. 

Read above, my message wasn't really about specifications,
but about the existence of a logic in my view. Yes, "my
own idea of them" was kinda the point.

And, by the way, presenting my view includes disagreeing
with Mark *and* specifications if necessary. :)

Anyway, like I stated above, too much work and too little
sleep made my previous message come out not quite as I
intended in some parts. If you felt offended by any of
them, I am sorry.

Let's just have a beer and keep discussing productively. :)

(in particular, the very interesting "IMs have broadcast
functions" point you brought up is something I'd like to
focus on)