[Kde-pim] Kontact Touch Mail - Usecases

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Saturday 25 May 2013 17:10:34 Heiko Tietze wrote:
> On Sunday, 2013-05-19, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > On Friday 17 May 2013 19:23:11 Michael Bohlender wrote:
> > Björn, Kevin, what's your take? Please review the wiki page as well,
> > thanks!
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Bjoern asked me to do the review because he is very short in time. So here
> are my two cents:

Thanks for pitching in!

> * You did collect requirements, not use cases.

True. I think the level of user requirements presented in this list is okay 
for a project of this size, though. Defining actual use cases may be useful as 
well, but I feel that the requirements should do at least for now.

> * Software shouldn't contain "exotic" function in terms of unnecessary
> stuff. According Kano (and the respective method -> Wikipedia) there are
> basic functions, performance features, excitement stuff, and features that
> lead to rejection. Prioritization includes those features and the amount of
> work. But all core functions (aka basic features) should be available.

A well, we have different goals here: The list was originally written not in 
order to prioritize implementation, but to decide how prominently a feature 
should be placed in the UI. That's why the categories are related to frequency 
of use, not to importance. However, the category labels where probably 
misleading. I've updated the page with new suggested frequency categories.
This also explains for example why spell checking is in the "core" category in 
our list but you suggest putting it in the "buzz features" category (and I 
agree to that): Users can live without it, but if it's there, it should be 
placed prominently in the "New mail" screen because it's used regularly when 
writing a mail.

> * I'd recommend to reorganize the bullets. My proposal can be found at top
> of http://community.kde.org/index.php?title=Plasma/Active/mail (original is
> below <hr>)

I believe that in the end, we need both: A list of requirements including 
priorities to decide what to implement when, and a list of "user actions" with 
estimated frequencies of use to decide what to place prominently.
So I'd suggest keeping both lists, each for its own purpose, but harmonizing 
them (e.g. a feature we deem frequent is most likely also a basic 
requirement).

> * I added some requirements from kmail but don't know how interessting they
> are because of its technological relation (e.g. authentification) -> marked
> with ?

I've written some comments on them.

> * I would propose to change some priorities. Have a look for "C -> A", for
> instance.

I've changed those where I agree and commented where I don't.

> Cheers,
> Heiko.

Cheers,
Thomas