65492 - Clean up msg display pref pane (no fluff please)

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(SeaMonkey :: MailNews: Message Display, defect)

Description

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

The panes is full of redundancy.

Of "Use the following settings when  displaying quoted plain text messages:",
only "Qoutes" is new info - everything else is implied by the context. Similar
all over the dialog.

I cleaned that up. The result is less vertical screen space used and a IMO
better overview.

I'll attach a patch and before/after screenshots.

Please r=.

Comment 1

[jglick]

Attachment: Current

Comment 2

[jglick]

Attachment: Proposed

Comment 3

[jglick]

Added Ben's before and after screen shots above.

I think I prefer the current. Removing the descriptive text makes it difficult 
to be sure what the settings are for.  Users don't always read the title box 
names.  And even if they do, it still doesn't explain real clearly what the 
settings will do. Many of the other pref panels also provide additional text to 
explain the settings.

Robin, mpt, any comments?

Comment 4

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

I mailed Jen and putterman, because Bugzilla was down. Posting replies here.
Jen, thanks for attaching the imgs.

Robin wrote:
> I'd prefer to see the text above the two radio buttons remain ("Use this font
> when displaying plain text messages:"), since this text helps the radio
> buttons choices.

Yes, I can see a reason for that - the text grours the radio group optically
(better would be a box, but I guess, you don't want nested boxes).

What about:

Font
  o Variable width
  o Fixed width

?

> Otherwise, I'm OK with the changes Ben proposes. Jennifer, what do you think?

-Robin

Scott Putterman wrote:
> It does seem redundant. I don't have any problem with that, though I'm not
> sure if users catch the grouping title and need more info. Robin or Jennifer,
> any comments?

jglick wrote:
> it still doesn't explain real clearly what the settings will do.

Well, the current sentences are in *no* way better, since there is no additional
info at all in them :-).

Comment 5

[timeless]

can we make emoticons give a definition?

where do i specify the font face for plain text messages?
Do i actually care about the fixed or variableness of a font if i can just pick 
it?

what is a character coding and why should a mortal know what it is?

Languages doesn't accurately describe the box.

Comment 6

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> where do i specify the font face for plain text messages?

There is no option in the UI, we observe the general FOnt pref by default.
(Note: This is not subject of this bug.)

Comment 7

[robinf]

I still prefer that the text above the two radio buttons remain ("Use this font
when displaying plain text messages:"), since this text helps to describe the
radio buttons choices for the font. As for the other proposed changes, I think
we should aim for clarity over brevity. In my personal experience, it took me
longer to figure out the meaning of the choices in the proposed dialog than it
did for me to figure out the meaning of the choices in the existing dialog.

Comment 8

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> In my personal experience, it took me
> longer to figure out the meaning of the choices in the proposed dialog than it
> did for me to figure out the meaning of the choices in the existing dialog.

FYI, my personal mileage is the extreme opposite. I need at least an order of
magnitude longer to completely scan/read and understand the current dialog than
the proposed one.

Comment 9

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

Is `an order of magnitude' as long as a piece of string? :-)

In my opinion most of these prefs shouldn't be in mail/news prefs panels at all. 
Quote color/style should be in a general `Colors & Effects' pane shared with 
Navigator (since it should eventually apply to Navigator too, see bug 39042); 
wrap text and emoticons should be in a submenu of the View menu, rather than in 
the prefs dialog; and default encoding should be in a `Text Encoding' dialog 
along with the rest of the encoding UI, rather than in the prefs dialog.

Now that I've got that off my chest ... Suggestions for wording changes, based on 
Ben's version:
* `Plain Text Messages' --> `When displaying plain text messages'
* `Fixed width font' --> `Use fixed width (monospace) font'
* `Variable width font' --> Use variable width font'
* `Quotes' --> `Show quoted text using:'
* `Display emoticons as graphics.' --> `Display "emoticons" as graphics'
* `For example, display ':-)' as *' --> `(For example, display ":-) as *)'
* `Languages' --> `Encoding' [bah, it's not `languages' at all!]
* `Default Character Coding:' --> `When a message does not specify its encoding,
  use:'
* `Apply default to all messages (ignore character coding specified by MIME
  header)' --> `Always use this encoding, even when the message specifies a
  different one'

Layout changes:
* The order of `Style' and `Size' should be reversed, to follow the canonical
  ordering on the toolbars of most word processors (font, size, bold/italic
  style, color). Even better, biff the `Size' UI entirely. Who needs it?
* Something needs to be done to line up the checkboxes and radio buttons in the
  first section. It looks messy.

Slightly off-topic: People not reading titledbox titles is probably the result of 
two bugs in Windows, both of which are repeated in the Modern theme: (1) the 
titledbox title does not use a larger font than the controls inside it, and (2) 
the groove is aligned with the center of the title rather than the baseline, 
making the text of the title harder to separate out from the surrounding 
graphics.

Comment 10

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

One point I forgot: please clean up the quotes. You should be using double curly 
quotes (“ and ”), both around the `:-)' *and* around the picture of 
the smiley.

Comment 11

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

This bug is about a very specific suggestion. Minor adjustments are OK (like the
first one from Robin), but I won't readd redundancy. Also, if the prefs should
be there or not is completely irrelevant.

> quotes [...], both around the `:-)' *and* around the picture of the smiley.

OK

> double curly quotes (“ and ”)

Why? Why not just <q></q> (assuming, tbat is available)?

> `For example, display ':-)' as *' --> `(For example, display ":-) as *)'
(i.e. add brackes around example)

I don't have a strong preference. Anyone else?

> Something needs to be done to line up the checkboxes and radio buttons in the
> first section. It looks messy.

There is an intend: The 2 radio boxes are a group (should be in a box, but are
only indented plus a "header" for optical reasons). The chechkboxes aren't.

timeless, please be more concrete, I don't understand most of your comments above.


The current suggestion is still the original one, plus quotes around the smily and

Font
  o Variable width
  o Fixed width

Are there any other minor suggestions? If not, can we vote on that please? If
this is rejected, I will WONTFIX this bug. I won't readd redundancy.

Comment 12

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

Ben, in a user interface avoiding `redundancy' is secondary to being easy to 
understand. If you propose the UI shown in your screenshot with added quotes and 
`Font', then I recommend WONTFIX because (even retaining the current punctuation 
errors) the current version is more attractive and easier to understand.

Comment 13

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> the current version is more attractive and easier to understand.

As I said, the extreme opposite is the case for me.

Comment 14

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

mpt wrote .in UI
<news://news.mozilla.org/[e-mail]>:
> then they scan the text quickly (which is
> why dialog text should be as short as possible)

hihihi.

Comment 15

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

To slightly misquote Albert Einstein: `... but no shorter!'

`Plain text messages (*) Fixed width font' does not make grammatical sense, and 
neither does `Font (*) Variable width'. `When displaying plain-text messages (*)  
Use fixed-width (monospace) font' does make grammatical sense. Therefore it's 
preferable, even though it's longer.

Comment 16

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

*Grammatic* is irrelevant, because my suggestion (Plain Text
messages|Font|Variable width) is intentionally no sentence. Neither is Open
File|File Name or Edit|Preferences|Mailnews|Viewing Messages. But they are very
*logical*.

Comment 17

[Jean-Marc Desperrier]

My 0,02 cents :

"Quotes" is too short, and not explicit *at all*.
"Show quoted text using" is only 4 words, Ben, this stays short enough to scan 
quickly.

Language/Encoding : This is not language for sure, but users who don't know what 
encoding is, can use a hint this is linked to "languages".

In fact, this probably should be moved to the appearance/font folder. 
This settings have no reason not to apply exactly the same to mail and browser, 
and are really hard to found for a new user currently.

Ideally, a new bug should be opened for a full recasting of every item linked to 
charset/encoding selection, to stop the current dispersion of this in 
View/Character Set, Preferences:Appearance/font and 
Preferences:Mail&Newsgoups/Messages.

Comment 18

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

> Ideally, a new bug should be opened for a full recasting of every item linked
> to charset/encoding selection

Bug 10999.

Comment 19

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> "Quotes" is too short, and not explicit *at all*.
> "Show quoted text using" is only 4 words

Could somebody please tell me why the latter should be better?
- "Show" is implicit through "viewing messages" - all prefs are about "showing"
messages.
- "text": All Quotes are text
- "using": no meaning at all, just a (IMO mislead) try to form a sentence

> this stays short enough to scan quickly.

No.
- The important word is 2., not 1.
- I have to read 4 words, while 1 would be enough.

Comment 20

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

Since I seem to be in the minority: Can we make a compromise and just remove the
<box>es around the 2 checkboxes and charset list? That way, I at least wouldn't
have to patch the xul file (avoids CVS merge conflicts), only the dtd (if I
accept minimal misalignments due to empty <html>s), for Beonex Communicator.

Still, I would be interested in a rationale for rejecting this, because I really
can't understand you.

Comment 21

[Jean-Marc Desperrier]

> - "text": All Quotes are text

No. For example, the double curly quotes discussed earlier in this bug are not 
text.
The shortest acceptable form not to lead _some_ user to wonder what kind 
of quotes are designed here, for longer than the time needed to read the 
sentence, is : 
"Quoted text"

Ben, I agree that the text in this dialog is too long.

For me, attachment 22806 [details] with the following changes is an enhancement over the 
original :

Font
  o Variable width
  o Fixed width

Quoted text
  style           Size 

Comment 22

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

Any comments?

Comment 23

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

->WFM. 7 years later, I think we can close this, it's not very relevant for either sm or tb anymore since wording etc. has changed and evolved.