Hi Mimi, > Do you mean in the first line of text? Yes, we can get rid of the 'send > on date'
Yes. That'd be lovely. > ?? I'm not sure I follow. You're having trouble distinguishing the event > details from the 1st line of text? If we remove the "sent on date" on the first line, that'll resolve some of my confusion, but: > What if it looked like this... > > ===== > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent you a > Any-time Event from Chandler: ** > * > * > *Mimi in NYC Apr 4-27th* at NYC from Apr 4, 2007 to Apr 27, 2007 > > <Notes go here> This does seem much better. But the *Mimi in NYC Apr 4-27th* being repeated three times (email subject, subject recapitulation in the email body, and then we spell out the event details immediately after this and they happen to match) still seems confusing to me. In cases where the title/subject *don't* include time details, this will scan nicely. Unfortunately, so far it seems pretty common for event updates to include some date redundancy in their titles (certainly I often put date info in the title of my simple events on my calendar). I think Chandler can't really know if there's going to be redundancy between the title and the event detail. Since cases like this seem to happen, I'd rather either never repeat the subject/title in the body, or add a little more structure, e.g., either: -------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent you a Any-time Event from Chandler: Title: Mimi in NYC Apr 4-27th Event detail: at NYC from Apr 4, 2007 to Apr 27, 2007 <Notes go here> -------- or -------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent you a Any-time Event from Chandler: Event detail: at NYC from Apr 4, 2007 to Apr 27, 2007 <Notes go here> -------- or (my favorite): -------- Any-time Event (location NYC) from Apr 4, 2007 to Apr 27, 2007, sent from Chandler by [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------- I realize the first two look more computer-formatted, but presenting redundant information as if it wasn't computer-formatted looks worse to my eye. Of course there's room for disagreement about this, not to mention about how often our target users will have this sort of redundancy. The final suggestion was prompted mainly by my desire to avoid the indefinite article. "a Any-time" or "an Task" (we don't do the latter, I'm just illustrating that we can't just switch to "an") both set my inner grammar nazi on fire. If we didn't include the title, it seems like this would work nicely. Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
