On Thursday 27 of October 2011 12:01:44 Kåre Fiedler Christiansen wrote: > On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 19:14 +0200, Dan Vratil wrote: > > <snip> > > > But I'd like to hear from all of you what do you think about the > > proposed > > look, what would you change or keep, or remove... I have printed the > > email in various mail clients so that you can compare it and find some > > inspiration :) > > > > Evolution - new look: http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/evo-webkit.pdf > > Is this the same email as the others? I ask because of the > "attachment.html" attachment that does not seem present in the others. > Also, there is no attachment named "lipsum.txt", though the text is > there.
Yop, it's the same, it's just that Evo handles some things differently, thus attachment.html is a HTML version of the plain/text body (can be disabled in settings, other MUAs seems to ignore it by default). lipsum.txt is missing because the attachment code is still buggy :) > The body of the text: Will you honour the font choice used for > displaying mail, when the mail is not preformatted? I'm thinking mostly > of whether it monospaced or variable width? I think that the best would be printing text/plain email in monospace and richtext and HTML emails in whatever font they have defined (or a default one). > > I like the fact that quoted text is slightly greyed; signatures after > "-- " should be as well. +1 > > I miss header for the lipsum.txt-attachment. Is this simply because it > is a mockup and forgotten, or do you expect the textual attachments to > have no headers? I would much prefer they do. > > I notice the size says "0 bytes", but I assume that's unrelated to the > layout? Bugs :) > > It's annoying to me the way the attachment names break in the icon list > of attachments, and I doubt the value of the icons - if they were > miniatures it might make sense, but as it stands it looks like a waste > of space in the printout. I would prefer as much of the actual content > of the email to be on the first page (while still having a decent > layout, and not advocating eliminating all whitespace or something), and > the list of attachments seems to obstruct that. Perhaps simply a marker > that there are attachments at the top (icon or "3 attachments"), and the > actual attachments at the bottom with or wotihout the list of > attachments first? I agree that it consumes a lot of space (but I like it! :)) Maybe just adding a header item "Attachments: 3"? > Also, information about the attachments are spread out all over the > place, file names at top, titles with the attachments. I agree, I didn't thought about this. The titles at the attachments should contain filenames in brackets. When no title is available, the file name would be used instead of it. > > I notice you simply ignore the digital signature. Suggestion: Why not > add it as an emblem in the headers? The digital signature in old Evo is a GtkWidget. We can't have GtkWidgets in webview anymore so I'm opened to ideas here. I'd agree with putting it to headers, just maybe having a text information like "GPG Signed (unverified)" or "S/MIME Encrypted" instead of an emblem would be more informative :) > > There are no headers or footers. Page numbers are important, I think, > but it would be even better with the subject in the footer as well, so a > lost page of an email could be identified easily. Sure, will be there. > > > Evolution - current look: http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/evo-master.pdf > > Good: Attachments presented at bottom with available info, page numbers, > digital signature is shown. > Bad: Very poor use of margins, much too little whitespace around > attahcments/sections. Very wide line spacing. > > I'm torn whether it's good or bad that plain text attachments are > monospaced. If it's code or tabular, I would much prefer it, if it's > English (or borken latin...) text it makes sense to use variable width. > Could be decided by mime-type? .txt files have always plain/text mime-type regardless their content. > > > KMail 2 (KDE 4.7.2): http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/kmail.pdf > > I just *love* a printout with the text "Please wait while the signature > is being verified..." Yop, they should work on this - I left the paper on my table all night and it's still verifying. > > Good: Very condensed, prominent subject. > Bad: Attachment info different: images below, text above; I don't like > the grey background for the box. And the hyperlinks are very useful, too :) > > Again, I'm torn about the monospaced quality, but that's an issue I have > with email generally :-) Certainly, the printout looks blocky and is > much prettier with variable width fonts, but monospaced text sometimes > contains formatting that is lost when going variable width. > > > Thunderbird 7.0.1: > > http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/thunderbird.pdfhttp://pub.progdan.cz/evo/thun > > derbird.pdf > Good: I like the attachment presentation, except the title is missing. > Images are centered, much prettier! I like the list of attachments at > the very end, easy to look at the very end of the email to scan for a > certain attachment. > Bad: Headers and footers much too close to edge of paper, date in footer > seems to be date of printing, not date of email? Date of email is in the "Date" header. > > > GMail: http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/gmail.pdf > > Good: Very good header (except GMail logo is waste of space), nice large > readable subject with other info condensed but available. > Bad: Completely impossible to see that the text is from an attachment, > attachment presentation is just horrible, everything jumps around. Opera issue, in Chrome it looks _slightly_ different but still ugly. > > > MS Outlook 2007: http://pub.progdan.cz/evo/outlook.pdf > > Good: No > Bed: Yes > > :-) > > How can they simply *ignore* attachments? Oh - they are not completely > ignored, at least they are almost invisibly mentioned in headers... Office 2007 can't even print to PDF, I had to install a 3rd party software :) Maybe when printed on paper the attachments would be there. Hard to say, I didn't manage to have the virtual machine see the printer. > > > I like the idea of the big header in MS Outlook, just instead of > > recipient's name I'd rather put there subject of the email, because > > when you have a pile of printed emails on the table, you most probably > > want to search by their subject. Seeing your name in big letters on > > every email makes no sense to me. > Agree, I like GMails look that way. > > > Attachments. I actually don't like the way any of the clients handle > > attachments (maybe Thunderbird...). Listing of attachments is ugly and > > the title of every attachment is quite ugly as well. I'm proposing the > > top panel with attachment icons and names (which is actually very > > similar to the attachment bar you can see in Evolution in the email > > preview pane) and then having a big distinguishible header above each > > attachment with more detailed informations, or maybe just a horizontal > > line with small attachment title and additional informations. > > I think I covered it in my ramblings above, but basically I don't like > the icon top bar, it takes too much space and the icons seem not to add > any value. Also, info is spread out all over the place. > > > So guys, what do you think? What would you like to see in Evo-printing > > :) ? > Well, that's my opinions. Hope you can use it. > > Best, > Kåre > Thanks for your opinions. - Dan > _______________________________________________ > evolution-list mailing list > [email protected] > To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list [email protected] To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
