Re: [Pan-users] About colors of read and watched messages...

[Maurizio Colucci]

Hi Bobby,

> > > I think a nice intuitive solution would be to use a light - medium -
> > > dark color scheme for read - unread - new, and just use different
> > > color schemes for the watched and unwatched variants of that
> > > typology.
> >
> > I'm against. :-P
> > In my opinion, more than two colors are unintuitive.
>
> Not if the usage is systematic.  See below.
>
> > Furthermore, we are assigning the same kind of identification (color)
> > to different concepts (watched and read)...
>
> Actually there are two orthogonal components of the typology:
>
> The first is "watched" vs. "not watched".
>
> The second is "read" vs. "unread" vs. "new", i.e. how much previous
> attention the article has received.

I apologize, but in this sentence you seem to mix different concepts once 
again: the "new" concept is separate from read-unread.

(Furthermore, but this is another matter, I would completely eliminate  the 
"new" feature because I can see no use for it... after all, new unread 
messages and old unread messages are on the same level, since I have to read 
them both. Why a message downloaded now would be more important than one 
downloaded one hour ago?)

> The current system uses a color scheme to differentiate between watched
> and not-watched; I suggest continuing that.

Why?

> The current system also uses a color or value (darkness) or font
> (boldness) scheme to differentiate between "read" vs. "unread" vs.
> "new", and I also suggest continuing that.

You still don't say why this solution would be better than the one I proposed 
in reply to Duncan and at the end of this message.

If it's just because it minimizes changes to existing code?
I can't say that I agree with such an argument.
Ok, this is free software, but not second-level software.

> The only thing novel about my suggestion is making the two systems
> completely orthogonal in the implementation, as they are in the
> typology.  Light-medium-dark for color 1 in unwatched threads and for
> color 2 in watched threads.

This would make me sick... 
1) Suppose you see a bunch on black messages, and between them you see, 
isolated, one "blue" message.
Now, how do you tell which color is it? Is it dark blue, medium blue, or light 
blue?

In absence of blue neighbors, this would be at least annoying.

2) Suppose there are two near messages: one is medium blue, the other one is 
medium red. The meaning is, according to your definition, that one is old, 
unread and watched, and the other one is old, read and unwatched.
So they are on the same level (in the sense that you should read them both). 
But the difference doesn't leap to the eye! THe is NOTHING to bind them. 
(except of course, the fact that they have the same intensity of color, 
medium... but this is crazy. Try to imagine).

These are only two situations, but I guess there will be many others.

> In fact the boldness for "new" is already orthogonal to watched vs.
> unwatched

And this is fine, because I must stress that they are independent concept...

> so five of the six cells in the typology are already coded
> consistently.  All that's needed is to bring the sixth one on board.
>
> Optionally let users specify their own color scheme for each category,
> but the above would make a good intuitive default because you would
> only have to learn two concepts rather than six different colors.  It
> would also let you keep your eyes on the subject lines as you skimmed
> rather than having to continually glance off to the left to see what a
> thread's status is.

No, because

1) it would be evident, you would see it with the back of the eye.
because the icon is ONLY besides unwatched threads. I assure you because I 
used Agent for years.

2) what's more, the watch feature does not need to leap to the eye! :-) Think 
about it a while... how do you use the watch feature? First, you locate a 
watched thread. Second, you read it. THen you would need to look at the icon 
only on phase 1. During reading you wouldn't need it.

I suggest you to try Agent (under Windows, alas) for a while, and tell me 
what's wrong about it.

The behavior of agent is the following:

  1 icon for watched (no icon for unwatched)
  1 icon for flagged  (no icon for unflagged)
  1 icon for attachment (no icon for no attachment)
  color for read-unread (the icon could be abandoned).
  no "new" feature.

with no need for multiple fonts and no drawbacks (as far as I can see).

thank you
Comments appreciated,

Maurizio