1861758 - Beta 120 message list card view items are too tall

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1858578

(Thunderbird :: Folder and Message Lists, defect)

Description

[[:nickname] Wisewiz]

Attachment: Clipboard02.jpg

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Steps to reproduce:

I set Vertical view, no message pane, cards view.

Actual results:

Message list has three lines per item, but nothing in third line except Star, BIG waste of vertical space. Please put the star on the same line as subject.

Expected results:

The message list pane should be like the ones in 115.* : star and subject are on the same line.

Comment 1

[[:nickname] Wisewiz]

Attachment: From 115 cards view

120b message list item space is much too tall in Cards view. 115 was good.

Comment 4

[Anje]

I was under the impression that this third line has been created because the upcoming new design elements will be using it.
https://thunderbird.topicbox.com/groups/ux/Tdb49a4666565e68e/cards-view-ui-plans

I did ask for new design to include a means of choosing a 'simplified' version of display over two lines which looks similar to what was used in a pre beta 120* design as not everyone will want a cluttered multicoloured view with load of icons.
In other words, I think this was intentional.

Comment 6

[Richard Leger]

Attachment: three-line-per-card-inefficient on small screens.png

Please review an consider design changes to allow seeing message card over two line instead of three for those that want it... as per Bug 1864393. The current default design is highly inefficient on a small screen such as a 14" laptop... This was also requested recently in Topicbox feedback about Card UI.

Also the GroupBy section when option is enabled would not need space line before and after...

"...

Having upgraded to TB 120.0b5 (64-bit) I noticed there are way too much interlining spaces in Card View > Message List especially in Compact mode.

Three messages take half my 14" laptop screen height ?! See attached...

I would expect each message card to be much more compact to allow more data on screen and reduce scrolling.

Some may like three row per message though in the attached example really not necessary! But other like me may prefer a more compact view on two rows per message which should suffice largely. User should be able to switch easily between those modes (two-lines vs three-line card view) as per recent feedback sent on Topicbox.

If you were to put Subject on the first line and Sender/Recipient on the second, you could put the icon list on the same line as the Sender/Recipient row.

The Card View shall be a bit more flexible in that regard, there are way to reduce the interline space within and between messages...

..."

Comment 8

[Elizabeth Mitchell]

(In reply to Richard Leger from comment #6)

Created attachment 9363278 [details]
three-line-per-card-inefficient on small screens.png

Please review an consider design changes to allow seeing message card over two line instead of three for those that want it... as per Bug 1864393. The current default design is highly inefficient on a small screen such as a 14" laptop... This was also requested recently in Topicbox feedback about Card UI.

Also the GroupBy section when option is enabled would not need space line before and after...

"...

Having upgraded to TB 120.0b5 (64-bit) I noticed there are way too much interlining spaces in Card View > Message List especially in Compact mode.

Three messages take half my 14" laptop screen height ?! See attached...

I would expect each message card to be much more compact to allow more data on screen and reduce scrolling.

Some may like three row per message though in the attached example really not necessary! But other like me may prefer a more compact view on two rows per message which should suffice largely. User should be able to switch easily between those modes (two-lines vs three-line card view) as per recent feedback sent on Topicbox.

If you were to put Subject on the first line and Sender/Recipient on the second, you could put the icon list on the same line as the Sender/Recipient row.

The Card View shall be a bit more flexible in that regard, there are way to reduce the interline space within and between messages...

..."

Thanks for the feedback.

We do plan to make the cards more compact. See bug 1858578.

The cards will be smaller, but these sizes will needs to account for different font sizes people may use.

For Group by Sort, please see bug 1861853 and bug 1863403. Due to the way card scrolling is calculated, cards are all the same height, including Group by Sort headers.

Two lines versus three - that's a great suggestion to offer support for both. I welcome you to submit your suggestion on Mozilla Connect. Others can support this suggestion.

Density - What density are you using? I recommend setting your Density to Compact if you need to fit more cards on your screen.

Thanks for the feedback.

Comment 9

[Elizabeth Mitchell]

(In reply to Anje from comment #4)

I was under the impression that this third line has been created because the upcoming new design elements will be using it.
https://thunderbird.topicbox.com/groups/ux/Tdb49a4666565e68e/cards-view-ui-plans

I did ask for new design to include a means of choosing a 'simplified' version of display over two lines which looks similar to what was used in a pre beta 120* design as not everyone will want a cluttered multicoloured view with load of icons.
In other words, I think this was intentional.

Yes, using three lines is intentional. We are adding features. A new set of Cards View features will be released in the next beta release. These changes are tracked in bug 1860631.

Comment 10

[Richard Leger]

(In reply to Elizabeth Mitchell from comment #8)

(In reply to Richard Leger from comment #6)
We do plan to make the cards more compact. See bug 1858578.

Good to know.

The cards will be smaller, but these sizes will needs to account for different font sizes people may use.

Yes sure.
But that does not mean the GroupBy Card shall be on three line as well... nor that I should not be able to see Message Card over two lines instead of three.

For Group by Sort, please see bug 1861853 and bug 1863403. Due to the way card scrolling is calculated, cards are all the same height, including Group by Sort headers.

This is complete non-sense. See Bug 1861853 Comment 5 for more details.

Density - What density are you using? I recommend setting your Density to Compact if you need to fit more cards on your screen.

My Density is already set to Compact in the attachment I sent in Comment 6.

Comment 11

[Richard Leger]

Attachment: cardview-density-relaxed-wide-view.png

(In reply to Richard Leger from comment #10)

(In reply to Elizabeth Mitchell from comment #8)

(In reply to Richard Leger from comment #6)
Density - What density are you using? I recommend setting your Density to Compact if you need to fit more cards on your screen.
My Density is already set to Compact in the attachment I sent in Comment 6.

Fyi, as expected, increasing Density to Default or Relaxed makes the situation way worth...
...and worthen even more when you enable View > Layout > Wide View...

I end up seeing only two messages in the Message List at the max while seeing only few lines in the message body as I reduce size of preview pane a bit to share the panel space between the two!

This is just a concrete use case example for your information...

Comment 12

[Anje]

Whilst 'Card View' can be used in any Layout - Classic, Wide or Vertical, it seems to work best in 'Vertical'.
Thus allowing more emails visible in list and also allowing more visibility of Message in Message Pane.
This seems to be the case because the Card View is more compact when it comes to width used to display a message in the list.

This does not mean there is not an issue should people want to use Classic or Wide Layout, but I do notice in the 'Mock up' of new design that there may be an assumption 'Vertical' is being used.

Query - just a thought - should 'Card View' only be available when people use 'Vertical' or if 'Card View' is selected then the Layout is auto altered by default to use 'Vertical' ?

Comment 13

[Elizabeth Mitchell]

(In reply to Anje from comment #12)

Whilst 'Card View' can be used in any Layout - Classic, Wide or Vertical, it seems to work best in 'Vertical'.
Thus allowing more emails visible in list and also allowing more visibility of Message in Message Pane.
This seems to be the case because the Card View is more compact when it comes to width used to display a message in the list.

This does not mean there is not an issue should people want to use Classic or Wide Layout, but I do notice in the 'Mock up' of new design that there may be an assumption 'Vertical' is being used.

Query - just a thought - should 'Card View' only be available when people use 'Vertical' or if 'Card View' is selected then the Layout is auto altered by default to use 'Vertical' ?

It sounds like some design discussions should happen related to making sure the cards display well in classic, wide, and vertical if cards are available in all of these layouts. Thank you for your feedback!

Comment 14

[Elizabeth Mitchell]

As I am working on making cards smaller in bug 1861758. I tested this using classic, wide, and vertical so that the sizes seem sensible on each of these layouts.

I definitely see the wisdom in allowing an option for 2 rows versus 3 rows in Cards View.

Thanks everyone for your feedback and help reporting these problems.

Comment 15

[Richard Leger]

(In reply to Elizabeth Mitchell from comment #13)

(In reply to Anje from comment #12)

Query - just a thought - should 'Card View' only be available when people use 'Vertical' or if 'Card View' is selected then the Layout is auto altered by default to use 'Vertical' ?

It sounds like some design discussions should happen related to making sure the cards display well in classic, wide, and vertical if cards are available in all of these layouts. Thank you for your feedback!

As confirmed already by Elizabeth, it would be judicious indeed for the Card view to be usable in any of the layout.
I support the idea.

I don't think anyone would like to be imposed a specific view layout just because the Card View is enabled.
Someone with a large monitor 17"+ may like to use Wide layout with Card View. Vice versa on an 11" screen you would probably switch to Table View.

In the end I think the option should be there to let the user choose best View/Layout options that fit his environment and workload/process.
I myself sometime tend to change those options temporarily depending on what I am doing or willing to achieve quickly, so it may not even be fully set in stone for an end-user, but be at taste on the moment :-)

It also allow end-users to test different options at will to see what fit them best their workload, or be able to easily change it over time.

Comment 16

[Richard Leger]

(In reply to Elizabeth Mitchell from comment #14)

I definitely see the wisdom in allowing an option for 2 rows versus 3 rows in Cards View.
I created enhancement Bug 1865057 in this regards.