Re: 'Delete' v. 'Move to trash'

[Andrew Conkling <andrewski fr st>]

On 08/01/05 11:55:59, Craig Routledge wrote:
> On 01/08/2005 04:31:44 AM, Pawel Salek wrote:
> > On 01/08/2005 04:43:00 AM, Craig Routledge wrote:
> > >  I think this
> > > whole  idea of two different ways of "deleting" messages is prone to  
> > > causing some confusion.
>
> > Yes, you are right in your analysis. Another difference between real  
> > (move-to-trash) and virtual (mark-as-deleted) trash models is that  
> > virtual trash folders are easiest to expunge on mailbox close: making  
> > them expunge messages on balsa exit may require opening them again,  
> > which may be time-consuming.
> >
> > What I would like to know is whether such an idea is not too radical: I  
> > mean would it not be a too big shock for a person who has just switched  
> > from another program? For a complete beginner? I cannot tell myself.
>
> If the virtual Trash shows up as a folder, just like the others,  
> beginners probably won't even notice.  People can either unhide deleted  
> messages in their normal mailboxes or look in the trash.  Either way, we  
> have just one delete method which should simplify both the interface and  
> the code.
>
> Sounds good in theory anyways.  I'm probably not the best judge of  
> people's expectations either.

I think this sounds like a good solution.  That would provide me with what  
I was hoping for all along (just a simple keystroke!) but would also  
provide many different types of users with good performance and not too  
many unexpected behaviours.  Anything more complicated might confuse me, at  
least... :)

Andrew