On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:41:42 -0600:
JHM
>> Count me as pu****ng the other way :)
Martin S:
> Why, if it was optional?
The tendered proposition appeared to mean
assuming _by_default_ that normal "Cc:" recipients
do not get attachments, and _that_ struck me
as something worthy of a remark (or a rant :)
In any case, the nature of email trans****t (SMTP)
requires separate messages to be sent,
whenever content differs,
as I think everyone realizes and acknowledges,
so what next to consider
is what sort of user interface
might facilitate the creation of such extra messages,
perhaps saving a step from just using the existing "Send again."
To be a worthy thing, it should really save more effort than it takes,
should be flexible enough to easily be varied between users,
and even between one message and the next, for that matter,
and also should not "weigh down" the interface for all those others
who haven't any interest in this sort of thing;
it should also not create a pitfall to be fallen into,
by anyone who doesn't realize the consequences,
or who might readily forget to turn it off when not wanted.
The design of human interfaces with technology is quite an art,
even if called "Human Factors Engineering,"
and I wanted to stir some thoughts about it, using this example.
It's like all fields in life -- we have our personal perspective,
others have their own. To devise the finest way
for all to achieve, as much as possible,
their diverse desires, weighted with appropriate values,
with adverse effects as few as possible,
is the great balancing act of civilization,
requiring the broadest awareness.
--
|
