1602470 - END key in recipient field should conveniently offer text cursor after last pill

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Thunderbird :: Message Compose Window, enhancement)

Description

[Thomas D. (:thomas8)]

I am looking at the latest available iteration of bug 440377 (try build 73.0a1 (2019-12-06) (64-bit).*

STR

1. Recipient field with multiple pills, pill1 focused
2. Press END key (without modifier), expecting to add another recipient at the end

Actual result

• last pill selected
• pressing END again does not give cursor (nice try!)
• need to press another key, cursor-right, to get text cursor for adding recipient

Expected result

• cursor after last pill, ready for entering the next recipient
• but as long as Ctrl or Shift modifier are pressed, just land on the last pill

Rationale:

• I think it's much more likely to add another recipient at the end, as opposed to plain vanilla navigation to the last recipient with the intention of working on that. So let's be convenient for the most frequent use case.
• With text cursor after the last pill, the less likely use case of working on the last pill is still easy enough with cursor-left (and should really focus AND select the pill).
• However, things are different when it comes to selecting pills (as clearly evidenced by modifier key), that's when just selecting the last pill is required, and text cursor would be irritating.

I have skipped HOME key from this bug for now because it requires a general decision on "cursoring" in recipient fields first (whether we allow insertion points between pills).
IF we allow inter-pills insertion points, then obviously HOME must behave the same way by analogy.

*: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try-comm-central&revision=674bb73bd2b093deb8170dc8ecd7d67b5d1239a9

Comment 1

[Thomas D. (:thomas8)]

I just noticed that gmail has exactly the behaviour which I propose here; such consistency is an added advantage if the behaviour is good ;-)

Comment 2

[Alessandro Castellani [:aleca]]

Did you test this recently?
I implemented this edit before the original patch landed and it should work as you described.

Comment 3

[Thomas D. (:thomas8)]

(In reply to Alessandro Castellani (:aleca) from comment #2)

Did you test this recently?
I implemented this edit before the original patch landed and it should work as you described.

Yes, thank you for fixing this in the original patch.

Comment 4

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

Let's mark it INVALID since it never existed in the landed code.