<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> 
<?xml-stylesheet href="https://dev.horde.org/themes/horde//default/feed-rss.xsl" type="text/xsl"?> 
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"> 
 <channel> 
  <title>Unable to mark messages as &quot;read&quot; in the dynamic view</title> 
  <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:02:27 +0000</pubDate> 
  <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432</link> 
  <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" title="Unable to mark messages as &quot;read&quot; in the dynamic view" href="https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432/rss" /> 
  <description>Unable to mark messages as &quot;read&quot; in the dynamic view</description> 
 
   
   
  <item> 
   <title>Right-clicking on an unread message only offers &quot;Mark as -&gt; </title> 
   <description>Right-clicking on an unread message only offers &quot;Mark as -&gt; Unread&quot;. The expectation would be that the menu offers to mark such a message as &quot;read&quot;. While this is an insignificant problem when selecting a single message it would be nice if it would be possible to mark many messages as &quot;read&quot; at the same time.</description> 
   <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 05:38:34 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61011</link> 
  </item> 
   
  <item> 
   <title>First, I don&#039;t see an &#039;Unread&#039; option, I only see an &#039;Unseen</title> 
   <description>First, I don&#039;t see an &#039;Unread&#039; option, I only see an &#039;Unseen&#039; option (unseen is the correct nomenclature to use pursuant to RFC 3501).

Second, we have an &#039;Unmark as...&#039; &gt; &#039;Unseen&#039; option.

I would rather not have BOTH Mark as &#039;Unseen&#039; and Mark as &#039;Read&#039; (actually, should be &#039;Seen&#039; to be consistent with the RFC).  The intent is that every option in the &#039;Mark As&#039; menu should have a corresponding action in the &#039;Unmark&#039; As menu.</description> 
   <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:16:48 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61030</link> 
  </item> 
   
  <item> 
   <title>Concerning &quot;unread/unseen&quot;: That was an imprecise translatio</title> 
   <description>Concerning &quot;unread/unseen&quot;: That was an imprecise translation as I was looking at the german version of the client. Sorry for that.

The &#039;Unmark as...&#039; &gt; &#039;Unseen&#039; works.

But I have to admit that I would expect the one or the other user to have similar problems as this double negation is maybe not what every one would expect.

Is there a specific reason to split into &quot;Mark as/Unmark as&quot;? My expectation would be that the client only offers the markers that are actually available for a given message. Or a set of messages. But things become undeniable  more difficult if the user selected several messages at the same time.
</description> 
   <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 04:55:27 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61031</link> 
  </item> 
   
  <item> 
   <title>&gt; But I have to admit that I would expect the one or the oth</title> 
   <description>&gt; But I have to admit that I would expect the one or the other user to 
&gt; have similar problems as this double negation is maybe not what every 
&gt; one would expect.

This has been changed with the flag changes pushed within the last month.

&gt; Is there a specific reason to split into &quot;Mark as/Unmark as&quot;? My 
&gt; expectation would be that the client only offers the markers that are 
&gt; actually available for a given message. Or a set of messages. But 
&gt; things become undeniable  more difficult if the user selected several 
&gt; messages at the same time.

Yes - the issue is with multiple message selection - there&#039;s not a tremendously clean way of handling this in that case.

I would not be against having a single &#039;Mark As...&#039; submenu, and then having checkmarks (or an equivalent UI element) indicating which flags are currently set - selecting a flag would toggle that flag.  One drawback of this approach is that the UI between dimp and imp would not parallel each other - in IMP there is not really a clean way of doing this without listing both Mark and Unmark.  But maybe we don&#039;t care about UI continuity between the different displays (?)</description> 
   <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:13 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61456</link> 
  </item> 
   
  <item> 
   <title>Changes have been made in Git for this ticket:

Request #943</title> 
   <description>Changes have been made in Git for this ticket:

Request #9432: Better context menu UI for setting/removing flags

http://git.horde.org/horde-git/-/commit/25e35e391de3bff99e5a447bd1aeadfe345f957f</description> 
   <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:23:08 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61475</link> 
  </item> 
   
  <item> 
   <title>&gt; Yes - the issue is with multiple message selection - there</title> 
   <description>&gt; Yes - the issue is with multiple message selection - there&#039;s not a 
&gt; tremendously clean way of handling this in that case.

Resolved by using Mark/Unmark for multiple message selection and using &#039;Mark&#039; only when dealing with a single message.</description> 
   <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:23:46 +0000</pubDate> 
   <link>https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/9432#t61476</link> 
  </item> 
   
   
 
 </channel> 
</rss> 
