Closed Bug 905940 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

[Buri][Email] E-mail app compose UI uses a non-monospace font but the message reader uses a monospace to display text/plain; the received message may display slightly differently for font reasons

Categories

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::E-Mail, defect)

defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(tracking-b2g:backlog)

RESOLVED FIXED
1.3 C3/1.4 S3(31jan)
tracking-b2g backlog

People

(Reporter: sync-1, Assigned: jrburke)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [p=1])

Attachments

(4 files, 1 obsolete file)

AU_LINUX_GECKO_ICS_STRAWBERRY.01.01.00.019.184 Firefox os v1.1 Mozilla build ID:20130806071254 Created an attachment (id=466776) pic-issue DEFECT DESCRIPTION: The content display abnormally when you receive the mail. REPRODUCING PROCEDURES: 1.Login in a gmail account 2.Receive a mail that the content contains"000000",read the mail ,you will find that the content display abnormally.--->KO EXPECTED BEHAVIOUR: The content should display"000000",display normally. ASSOCIATE SPECIFICATION: TEST PLAN REFERENCE: TOOLS AND PLATFORMS USED: USER IMPACT: mid REPRODUCING RATE: 5/5 For FT PR, Please list reference mobile's behavior:
Clone from brother
Attached image pic-issue
Clone from brother
Attached file QXDM_log
We use a monospace font when we receive text/plain messages, but we're not using a monospace font during the compose process when we create text/plain messages. The monospace font tries to clearly distinguish between the number 0 and the letter O. The choice of a monospace font for text/plain display was made for consistency with Thunderbird's defaults. Changing it is a UX call. Needinfo'ing Rob since changes to message display are a koi/1.2 goal, althyough there is no spec yet, so it might slip to 1.3.
Flags: needinfo?(rmacdonald)
Priority: P2 → --
Summary: [Buri][Email][Inputmethod]The content display abnormally when you receive the mail. → [Buri][Email] E-mail app compose UI uses a non-monospace font but the message reader uses a monospace to display text/plain; the received message may display slightly differently for font reasons
blocking-b2g: --- → koi?
Andrew, in 1.1 you should see a new font... Fira Mono, you can use that as the default for simple text email. Which should read nicer than what is the current default. I do think there is a benefit to show a difference between Simple text and HTML emails.
Removing the flag for Rob since Patryk addressed this. Thanks, Patryk!
Flags: needinfo?(rmacdonald)
blocking-b2g: koi? → -
Attached patch email_display_error.patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This bug is still on v1.3, please help to fix it.
Attachment #8359029 - Flags: review?(ehung)
Flags: needinfo?(ehung)
blocking-b2g: - → 1.3?
In comment #6, a UX person, Patryk, indicated that there is benefit between showing a difference between simple text and HTML emails via a font choice, but his choice was for using the "Fira Mono" font. Has there been an update from UX since then that suggested the change in the patch to use "font-family:arial,sans-serif;"?
Not a regression, so this is not a blocker.
blocking-b2g: 1.3? → -
Comment on attachment 8359029 [details] [diff] [review] email_display_error.patch I'm not the one who can review email app's patch. redirect to :jrburke.
Attachment #8359029 - Flags: review?(ehung) → review?(jrburke)
Flags: needinfo?(ehung)
Comment on attachment 8359029 [details] [diff] [review] email_display_error.patch Review of attachment 8359029 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Removing review flag until we get UX confirmation of the change. Flagging Juwei, the current UX owner for email. I will flip it back to me to review if UX wants to proceed. Juwei, see previous comments for background. Last UX guidance was not in line with the patch, but best to get a fresh perspective on it.
Attachment #8359029 - Flags: review?(jrburke) → feedback?(jhuang)
Re-flag to Patryk for visual confirm. Hi Patryk, should we use "FiraSans" for reading message and "FiraMono" for compose UI ?
Flags: needinfo?(padamczyk)
The more I think about it and compare all other email clients (desktop and mobile), I would opt for the best user experience. That would be a font that is nice to read. The monospaced font has its advantages in spreadsheets and coding, plain text emails used a monospaced or generic font since that was the system "fall back" or default. I don't believe the average user, our users who are less tech centric care for that legacy design choice, they will probably ask... why on some emails the text looks one way and on others it looks another way. Also I would suspect most email would be recieve in plain text. So lets make plain text email use Fira Sans for both reading and composing. As technology progresses there is less need to make that distinction.
Flags: needinfo?(padamczyk)
Assignee: nobody → jrburke
Target Milestone: --- → 1.3 C3/1.4 S3(31jan)
Attached file GitHub pull request
Changes text-only emails to use default non-monospace font, and matches its size with what is used for compose. Compose also removes the use of a monospace font. Asking :asuth to review for historical context reasons. I will attach a screenshot of how it looks like now for a text email and compose.
Attachment #8367675 - Flags: review?(bugmail)
Capture of how it looks with the latest patch. The screen on the left is a text only email using the inherited font, and the one on the right is compose using the inherited font, not a monospace one. Asking Patryk for needsinfo to confirm it matches UX desires.
Flags: needinfo?(padamczyk)
Look(In reply to James Burke [:jrburke] from comment #16) Looks correct to me. Thanks.
Flags: needinfo?(padamczyk)
Comment on attachment 8367675 [details] [review] GitHub pull request I'm pretty sure users actually want Comic Sans, but okay ;)
Attachment #8367675 - Flags: review?(bugmail) → review+
Attachment #8359029 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8359029 - Flags: feedback?(jhuang)
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Whiteboard: [p=1]
Bug 988747 asked for 1.3? and the end result fix is the same as the fix in this ticket, so nomming this one instead and marked 988747 as a dupe.
blocking-b2g: - → 1.3?
(In reply to James Burke [:jrburke] from comment #21) > Bug 988747 asked for 1.3? and the end result fix is the same as the fix in > this ticket, so nomming this one instead and marked 988747 as a dupe. If that's the case, then this isn't a regression. This bug has been present since 1.1 & was fixed for 1.4, so this wouldn't block.
blocking-b2g: 1.3? → backlog
blocking-b2g: backlog → ---
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: