Hi Bobby, > I understand that we want to keep (some!) end-users' mental-maps simple. > But we don't have to do that in a way that makes Cosmo less useful and > cripples an existing spec (the tickets spec). > > Just because one particular client (Chandler Desktop) doesn't ever want > to know about more than those tickets doesn't mean we should make it so > that no one else can us Cosmo that way if there are other ways around > it. Why not have some metadata on the tickets which says "these are the > Chandler Desktop Tickets" or something?
I think in this case what Mimi's proposing is that *2 clients* model tickets simply, Desktop and WebUI, so the workflows involving tickets can be similar. I think bcm was thinking that the easiest way to implement this would be to restrict (or cripple :), if you like) Cosmo's tickets at every level. It might be a little more work for the server, but perhaps it could work to have the WebUI and Desktop only display the default set of tickets, but keep the full range of ticket capabilities in the account browser (which I don't really think of as being part of the WebUI interface)? Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
