Devan Goodwin wrote:
> On 2/18/07, Erik Grinaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 08:23 -0500, Karoly Molnar wrote: - to
>> search or group accounts; for example, to have a dropdown for all
>>  the account types when searching, or to display a menu of
>> account types and all the accounts for them
>
> +1
+1(Although there is the tagging feature ;-)
>> - to have some common data for a group of accounts, such as the
>> launcher (so you don't have to manually set up a browser launcher
>> for all web accounts, or change every account when you change
>> your browser), or the icon (to visualize the account type in the
>> account list)
>
> +1
I can see what you are talking about and yes in some situation it can
be helpful. I just can't come up with one. On the browser example I
didn't think that a web account would need to contain a launcher
field. I though it is a global setting of the URL field.
Anyway I see that there is a need for this functionality even if I
wouldn't use it.
>> - to make template changes retroactively affect the accounts that
>>  belongs to them (for example, adding a field should add that
>> field to all accounts created from the template, and changing the
>> icon or launcher should change it for all accounts)
>
> +1
same as previous
>
> I think breaking the relationship between the account types (or
> templates) and the actual entries will make things much less
> convenient. Modifying an existing account type (or a template) is
> quite likely going to be something I would use, having to manually
> recreate or alter the fields on every existing entry of that type
> would not be pleasant.
>
Please let me know a real life situation when you'd use this feature
I'm really curious. I'd like to emphasize that I'm not criticizing or
want to defend my standpoint (I don't have one) I'm just simply
interested in what situation you'd need this.
> Searching and browsing by type, again also very useful.
>
+1 (Although there is the tagging feature ;-)
> I would strongly lean towards keeping a relationship between the
> type and the entry.
>



Reply via email to