Re: [Design] Do we want to be able to annotate read-only items?

[Mimi Yin]

Are you saying, intrinsic versus not intrinsic-ness of an attribute = needs to maintain integrity wrt r/w-ness versus doesn't need to maintain integrity wrt r/wness? I'm not sure if this relationship is necessarily true. Semantically it makes sense to me that a mailing list message is a "Task" for me because I need to reply to it, but is not necessarily a "Task" for Jeffrey, even though we're both subscribed to the same Discussion Collection. Or is that what you're trying to say? Because the examples you give in your next email seem to be in-line with this example. Hmmm, I'm feeling like this email has too many recursive pronouns.  Question Is Stamping as a Task an intrinsic attribute or a non-intrinsic attribute in your view? Mimi :o) On Apr 17, 2006, at 4:36 PM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote: Mimi Yin wrote: I guess conceptually, if we allow users to add read-only items to different collections, which in turn "label" the items accordingly...then what is the difference between adding a read-only item to a ToRead collection in the sidebar versus: Stamping a read-only item to show up on My Task list. It seems like there is a conceptual difference here -- perhaps its related to what you have called "intrinsic" attributes and whatever it is we call attributes that are not intrinsic. It makes sense that you can put read only items in different kinds of containers, or are able to change relationships between editable items and read only items. That feels different from an end user perspective of having the "intrinsic" item feel like its half editable and half not editable, as in your stamping case above. Cheers, Katie _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design