<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: tag-prefix

On Thu, 02 Oct 2008, Kyle Wheeler wrote:

> On Thursday, October  2 at 11:21 PM, quoth bill lam:
> > Suppose I tag 2 msg inside a thread and then collapse it so that those 
> > tag items are invisible. Then tag-prefix (eg ;d) can not operate on 
> > those item. Apparently tag-prefix only applies to visible items, is 
> > this intended and what is the workaround?
> 
> My understanding (and I may be wrong) is that this is intentional. The 
> reasoning stems from the "limit" functionality, and is essentially: 
> users shouldn't be surprised that something got deleted. Deleting 
> things you can't see makes unfortunate, uncorrectable mistakes a very 
> real probability. Imagine, for example, that you'd tagged something, 
> forgotten about it, and then limited your view, tagged a few things 
> and then told mutt to delete all tagged messages. Should the invisible  
> tagged message be deleted? There may be a difference of opinion, but 
> in the interest of not surprising the user, "no" is perfectly valid. 
> And as an alternate behavior to prompting me every time with "do you 
> really want to delete this message?" (which would be *really* 
> annoying), I think it makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Now, whether this argument still ought to apply in the case of 
> collapsed threads, I don't know, and that's something worth discussing 
> from an interface point of view.

I can agree to your argument, either way half of innocent users will be
surprised. Can I make a ;! or ;; that will apply to all tagged items,
visible or not?

-- 
regards,
====================================================
GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3