Hello Marck,
On Friday, October 13, 2000 at 01:37:17 GMT +0100 (which was 5:37 PM
where I live) witnesses say Marck D. Pearlstone typed:
> By view the kludges you can clearly see all recipients. It's not
> pretty, but it's there.
I suppose, but there is so much other junk in there. It can be a pain
to find the info.
JA>> I think the best solution would be for the Address Auto-view
JA>> dialogue to include a tab with a textbox containing the members of
JA>> the list one per line. Also there should be some way to indicate
JA>> who in in the sender field, To field and Cc field. Perhaps
JA>> colours or an icon could do this job. Alternately, the dialogue
JA>> box could have 4 extra tabs, one for each field.
> Either of these implementations would be good.
The only additional request I'd like to append is to make the dialogue
resizeable. There is no way to estimate what will be convenient for
even a majority of users. But as long as the dialogue box is of user
defined size and has sticky settings, the RIT guys don't have to worry
about making that decision.
JA>> It would also be nice if this system ported to the message editor
JA>> window as well. In the message editor, Netscape Messenger 4.5 has
JA>> best system. If you've never seen how Netscape does this part,
JA>> let me know and I'll produce a screen capture.
> I haven't. Send it to me off-list.
I posted it on TBOT in the files section:
http://www.egroups.com/files/tbot/Netscape+Messenger+Capture.PNG
To be correct, this is for version 4.7. It doesn't matter what the
exact version is though, see the picture for key details.
JA>> Perhaps another possible solution would be to create a temporary
JA>> address book with the various recipients and senders as entries.
JA>> I'm not entirely sure how this would work, but it is another
JA>> solution the developers might consider.
> Sounds a bit of an overkill to me <g>.
Ok, I'll grant you that one. :) I was just offering yet another idea.
I really don't know how much code and/or work would be required for
each of these ideas. By offering options to the developers, hopefully
they can synthesize an even better solution. Case and point: Colour
groups.
> Let's hope that these ideas and thoughts make an impact on the new
> work being done towards V2. I don't think I'd like to see V2 slowed
> down to have modified functionality of this magnitude in V1.
Sure that's reasonable. V1, V2, it's all the same to me. TB in it's
current form is quite different from the TB I registered. A lot has
been added, and a lot has been fixed. I'm not going to insinuate that
my suggestion has any greater priority than other suggestions.
> I know they've been proving some of the new V2 technology in the
> latest V1 upgrades but it seems to me that these new technologies
> have all been brand new features rather than enhancement to existing
> facilities. S/MIME, MAPI, new mail-base structures, etc.
I agree. I registered with v1.35 or 1.36 (I don't remember). The
changes between that version and the current version would be worthy
of a V2 status if it were from any other company. Just take a look at
the length of the version 1.42 update list and all the features
since then. It is incredible. I'm happy that I'm not the one doing the
coding. :)
--
Thanks for writing,
Januk Aggarwal
See header for e-mail address
Using The Bat! 1.47 Beta/7
under Windows 98 4.10 Build 2222 A
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBBETA archive at http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double-click HERE:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBBETA, double-click HERE:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
