On Friday 05 October 2007 18:15, Olivier Goffart wrote:

> > No, I disagree. The common instant messaging lingo refers to a "contact"
> > as an AIM screenname, or an MS Live account, or a ICQ number, etc. Using
> > "contact" in a way that is so close to--but yet different from--its
> > common usage would cause undue confusion.
>
> No no no  that's wrong IMO
> From my experience this is not the case.
> It is only the case for us, developers.
>
> I think that "contact" mean "person that i can contact", and a contact may
> have several accounts.
Yes, I agree that that is a very good interpretation, my only worry is that 
changing the meaning between Kopete versions will mess with user's heads.
>
> ( http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/contact )
>
> > Also, current Kopete users would be confused when a term they already
> > know changes meaning.
>
> That's maybe true, but I'm not really sure it will pose usability problem
> because the meaning is not constant right now.
>
> > > But the question is now: But how to call the subcontacts ?
> > > "Account" is already taken by the user account.
> > > In fact, why not call it "Address" ?  yes, subcontact are only object
> > > contact for the protocol code. But in fact, for the user, they are just
> > > addresse of the metacontact.
> >
> > "Address" is too easily confused with email address.
>
> That's wrong either IMO. An "address" as it means nothing. It must be
> specified if it is a postal address, a email address, a jabber id, or a icq
> number.  But this is still the address, isn't it ?
>
> I'm not a native english speaker anyway.
> I have to admit that address is maybe not the best word. maybe "identifier"
> ?
I've changed my mind since a few days ago. You're right. If we are going to do 
this switch, we should do Contacts/Addresses.

>
> We should not see the 'subcontacts' as object as it (in the interface) but
> rather as (meta)contact attributes
>
> > In my opinion, Kopete should use Contact's (as they are now) contained
> > within Person's (replacing MetaContact). KAddressBook calls a single
> > person a "Contact", which is fine terminology for them, but due to
> > already established instant messaging lingo, this would be too confusing
> > for Kopete to use.
>
> If KAB call a single person a "Contact", we should do that same, since a
> KAB contact is exactly the same thing as the current KopeteMetaContact.
>
> Remember the idea that Kopete is just a sort of GUI for the addressbook.
I couldn't agree more.
_______________________________________________
kopete-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel

Reply via email to