Page MenuHomePhorge

If changing repeating event, option which to change not easy to see
Open, LowPublic

Assigned To
Authored By
Jan 9 2019, 1:29 PM
Referenced Files
F4604507: other_mobile2.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F4604477: summary.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F4604495: summary_mobile_2.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F4604489: summary_mobile.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F4604483: other.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F4604501: other_mobile.png
Aug 7 2019, 8:31 PM
F3933168: calendar_editor_summary.png
Feb 11 2019, 10:54 AM
F3933171: calendar_editor_other.png
Feb 11 2019, 10:54 AM


When changing only one of a repeating event, it is possible, the option where to choose which one to change is at the bottom of the page though and you have to scroll to find it. It would be a lot easier if it were at the top!

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Create repeating event
  2. choose one of the dates and click on change
  3. go to bottom

Actual result:
You have to scroll and option "change all" is default.

Expected result:
I can see at the top on first sight which one I am going to change, and can change it here (maybe option "only this event" should be default?).


Ticket Type

Event Timeline

bohlender moved this task from Done to 1 on the UX Seminar WS17 board.

Yeah, some clients even display the question dialog separately before you start editing. Another thing to do is to think about decluttering the dialog/form, so it does not display all these inputs initially and the question box is visible. Some UX work will be needed.

bohlender added a subscriber: machniak.

Alright. I take this one.

@machniak is that the direction you want to move into ?

calendar_editor.png (561×452 px, 18 KB)

@machniak This is what I came up with. Would that work for you?

calendar_editor_summary.png (845×928 px, 83 KB)

calendar_editor_other.png (643×463 px, 31 KB)

I like it. Especially that you didn't add a new tab, but merged with Attachments (we're limited on mobile). As once Jeroen was interested in decluttering event dialog, he might be interested to take a look. @vanmeeuwen

@bohlender you omitted the Reminder field, you think it should be in the Summary tab? I think it should.

@machniak the reminder can get pretty complex and add a lot of clutter. the easy solution was to (re)move it.
I will try another version with a redesigned reminder field.

@machniak I tried and it looks cluttered. What works is merging reminder and recurrence in one tab.
Would that work for you?

I don't think this is a good idea.

@machniak I gave roundcube development a try:

summary.png (756×713 px, 32 KB)

other.png (741×696 px, 28 KB)

summary_mobile.png (648×436 px, 80 KB)

summary_mobile_2.png (644×382 px, 31 KB)

other_mobile.png (638×397 px, 49 KB)

other_mobile2.png (638×383 px, 32 KB)

(09:06:30) bohlender: petersen: vanmeeuwen: I am in the process of reworking the event editor for elastic. (see for screenshots). there are two fields that don't seem to be used by kolab (privacy & priority). In the privacy case, this is actually a usability bug because users could assume that their "private" event is not displayed to others the calendar is shared with. Can we remove these two fields or am I missing a reason to keep them?
(09:08:21) vanmeeuwen: i don't care much for either, but private does have a use-case in the sending back and forth of invitations and the recipient putting it not in a default calendar but instead a calendar marked as private
(09:09:05) vanmeeuwen: so in this case the "private" checkbox would basically indicate "for any attendees that do have a private calendar to have wallace automatically store events in, put it there"
(09:09:30) petersen: How do you mean that they do not get used by Kolab? Those fields exist in Kolab and can be set..
(09:10:37) alec: you can set them, but that's all you can do + the case described above
(09:11:10) petersen: we have had a number of requests for the usecase mentioned above..
(09:12:06) petersen: priority doesn't make much sense to me in a calendar..
(09:12:25) vanmeeuwen: unless we make wallace obey it ;-)
(09:12:52) vanmeeuwen: "lunch, priority 3", "invitation to meeting, priority 1" -> BOOM
(09:13:00) petersen: right
(09:13:20) petersen: perhaps it doesn't make sense to me because we didn't do so yet
(09:14:19) vanmeeuwen: it's wrong in that it is at the sender's discretion
(09:14:25) petersen: with all the above in mind, I would not remove those for now - Bring it to Bern next week - We'll have time to discuss it on Wednesday
(09:15:26) bohlender: alright. thank you for your feedback
(09:15:41) vanmeeuwen: the simpler approach would be to remove the arbitrarily confusing shit out of the way of one's workflow
(09:15:55) vanmeeuwen: which is not to say i've reviewed the tickets / ideas / proposals
(09:16:09) petersen: we will discuss next Wednesday

bohlender moved this task from Done to Backlog on the UX Seminar WS17 board.