Re: [Mailman-Developers] admin approval page / cvs
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:36:14 -0700 Sean Reifschneider <jafo@tummy.com> wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 07:14:01AM -0800, J C Lawrence wrote:
No way. The headers are essential to me.
What about having separate text fields for the headers and the body?
Please, no. I need/want the message exactly as it was sent with no extra munging, implicit edits, ochanges in presentation etc. This is actually one of the main things I like about MM -- it doesn't attempt to package the pending-moderation messages in any way, but presents them to me exactly as they are.
-- J C Lawrence Home: claw@kanga.nu ----------(*) Other: coder@kanga.nu --=| A man is as sane as he is dangerous to his environment |=--
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 07:43:28AM -0800, J C Lawrence wrote:
Please, no. I need/want the message exactly as it was sent with no extra munging, implicit edits, ochanges in presentation etc. This
Ok, so it should be an option... I don't do much approval, so it really doesn't impact me. However, the primary information needed when doing an approval is the *BODY*, and that's generally obscured from the page as it is presented. From a Human Factors POV, that's inexcusable...
What about simply increasing the size of the edit field based on the number of lines in the message? That way you don't have to navigate into the text field and scroll to see the *PRIMARY* information you need to carry out the action.
Oh, and if you have the header and the body in one text field, is there code to ensure that the space separating the header from the body hasn't been accidentally removed?
Sean
"I'll thrash you like a Netscape process on a machine with 640K." -- John Shipman, 1998 Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <jafo@tummy.com> URL: <http://www.tummy.com/xvscan> HP-UX/Linux/FreeBSD/BSDOS scanning software.
participants (2)
-
J C Lawrence -
Sean Reifschneider