Hi Katie, > Jeffrey Harris wrote: >> Just as Chandler allows users to edit emails they receive (which isn't >> the normal behavior), I'd like to be able to edit read-only items I >> receive. > > Yup, that would be a cool feature. It is important to note though that > (1) *not* a requirement for Preview and (2) not certain that this will > be something we even get to for 1.0. That debate is for later, but I > think it a mistake to hold it as a high priority some way to squeeze > this in by tweaking the Cosmo architecture.
I wasn't clear about my thinking, sorry. Certainly we shouldn't block Cosmo for something in the future. I meant to say something more like this. I can see a scenario where we can have strict access controls on Cosmo, and not only continue to have existing sharing functionality but some additional cool stuff. Unfortunately I think this'll take quite a bit of work, and I'm worried that the interim state would be an unacceptable loss of functionality for clients. Here's the (I think common) recipe I'm worried will break if we go with items-are-unique-per-Cosmo-instance. 1. Mimi shares an event to osaf.us, then she emails it to Morgen 2. Morgen puts the event in a collection he's sharing on osaf.us 3. Morgen attempts to sync the collection and it fails unexpectedly One way of fixing this would be to have the desktop client do something clever with the UUID of the item if it gets a permission failure from Cosmo, which I think would be great, but a significant engineering effort. Perhaps there are other ways to make this recipe succeed? Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
