Hi Nicolai-- On 06/06/2014 04:39 AM, Nicolai Josuttis wrote:
> I am about to make the enigmail UI more convenient/self-explaining. > So, I have the following problem: > I want to give three choices for encryption (and other options): > 1) use default setting and rules > 2) turn encryption on > 3) turn encryption off > > Unfortunately there is no 3-way-toggle button. > But I want to give these three options in a menu. i'm assuming you're talking about the OpenPGP menu in a single compose window. is that right? At the moment, there are four options: Sign Message Encrypt Message -------------- Use PGP/MIME for This Message Ignore Per-Recipient Rules and they get little checkmarks when they're set. It seems like you could apply these options just for encryption, leaving the "Sign Message" alone, right? Is there some sort of "default" signing scenario that people might want to revert to? All the options presented seem rather clunky to me, and (worse) they present a problem for feedback -- if you're in the default state, looking at this state should let you know whether the given message is going to be encrypted or not. have you thought about how to address this view in the icons in the status bar (the pencil and the key) as well? Unfortunately, i'm having a hard time coming up with something better. I looked around at ideas about tri-stated checkboxes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Checkbox_States.svg http://guijournal.com/2011/05/gui-design-tri-state-checkboxes/ but they don't seem particularly useful to me. Here are the things i'd like to come out of this decision: 0) to see at a glance what the state of the message is 1) to know if i'm using the defaults or not 2) to be able to move from the default to a forced-setting other than the current default 3) to be able to move from the default to a forced-setting that is the same as the current default 4) to be able to move from one forced-setting to another 5) to be able to move from a forced-setting back to the default Some of these might seem more like things that humans want than others. (3), for example, seems unlike something that a regular human would think about. But it is relevant in the context of "as i write this draft, the defaults might change and i don't want to worry about that" If there are three (or four?) categories that i want to be able to have all these features on, it's pretty complicated! Here are two more proposals to consider: A) explicit default/non-default action What if the idea of deviating from the defaults was explicit and it covered all the settings at once? So the initial setup might look like: * Encrypt (default) Sign (default) * PGP/MIME (default) ------------ Lock these choices If the user chooses "Lock these choices" then they go to: * Encrypt Sign * PGP/MIME ------------ Revert to defaults (Encrypted, unsigned, PGP/MIME) Likewise, if the user chooses to alter any of the three items individually, *all* of them move off of "defaults" For cleanliness, the parenthetical in the "Revert to defaults" entry could dynamically only show the diff between the defaults and the current choices. So, for example, using the above defaults, but if someone clicked "Encrypt" (to disable encryption), they'd see: Encrypt Sign * PGP/MIME ------------ Revert to defaults (Encrypt message) B) submenus The OpenPGP menu would have three menu items which show the state (and whether they're a default) textually (not with a checkmark), and each of them have submenus. The submenu itself would change based on the state of the value: Encrypted (default) > Force Encrypted Force Unencrypted Signed (default) > Force Signed Force Unsigned PGP/MIME (default) > Force PGP/MIME Force Inline PGP then, if you were to select "Force Unencrypted" the tree would show: Unencrypted > Use Default (Encrypted) Force Encrypted If the current state had the default of Unencrypted, then it would look like: Unencrypted > Use Default (Unencrypted) Force Encrypted or if they're in the default state: Unencrypted (default) > Force Encrypted Force Unencrypted It still seems very complex for users to deal with, for something that is suppoesd to be more convenient/self-explaining :( what do you think? sorry to not have better suggestions. --dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ enigmail-users mailing list [email protected] https://admin.hostpoint.ch/mailman/listinfo/enigmail-users_enigmail.net
