Closed
Bug 838000
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
[SMS/MMS][User Story] Dialer invocation from message
Categories
(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::SMS, defect, P1)
Tracking
(blocking-b2g:leo+, b2g18 fixed)
People
(Reporter: pdol, Assigned: ssaroha)
References
()
Details
(Keywords: feature, Whiteboard: [LOE:M])
Attachments
(6 files, 4 obsolete files)
UCID: Messages-003
User Story:
As a user, I want the ability to directly dial a phone number from a message so that I don't need to remember the number to manually enter it into the Dialer.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Summary: [B2G][SMS][User Story] Dialer invocation from message → [SMS][User Story] Dialer invocation from message
Updated•12 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → ssaroha
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
For the UX here, would it be similar to the behavior when you click on a phone number in the call log (attached screen shot)? That would address both this story and bug 838002.
Whiteboard: u=user c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-2 → u=user c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1
Reporter | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Summary: [SMS][User Story] Dialer invocation from message → [SMS/MMS][User Story] Dialer invocation from message
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: u=user c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 → u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Dylan:
Yes, that is right. It should be as shown in attachment 711610 [details] except that the title on that screen should be '<the phone number>' that the user tapped on instead of Add new number. Alternately, if that retrieving that information to this screen is costly, it can be 'Unknown number'.
As a side note, I would like another option to be added to the Call log scenario which is 'Send message' right after the call option (I don't know if there is already a user story or bug for that)
Arun
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Marking this as blocking bug 838002 then as it seems likely that both issues will be solved by the same fix.
Blocks: 838002
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Arun Balachandran Ganesan [:abc] from comment #2)
> As a side note, I would like another option to be added to the Call log
> scenario which is 'Send message' right after the call option (I don't know
> if there is already a user story or bug for that)
That looks like bug 838022, so we'll tackle it over there when that one is prioritized.
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Yes. Thanks, Dylan!
Thanks Arun for confirming the UX. I will go ahead and implement changes as per comment #2 and #3.
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
You are welcome, satender. Ping me on IRC if you have questions [:abc]
Updated•12 years ago
|
Depends on: b2g-mms-dom-api
Updated•12 years ago
|
Blocks: mms-userstories
Hi Fabrice,
just submitted a pull request for the sms changes at https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/pull/8159
please review.
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(fbsc)
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(fabrice)
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(alberto.pastor)
Whiteboard: u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 → u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 [LOE:M]=3-4 days
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
As suggested by Francisco, creating a separate pull request for contact activity changes for ease of review.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #716976 -
Flags: review?(fabrice.desre)
Attachment #716976 -
Flags: review?(alberto.pastor)
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
Hey :satender. Can we create diferent bugs for each one of the different Pull Requests? It will make it easier to merge and back out without affecting other working functionality.
Thanks!
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•12 years ago
|
||
hi Alberto,
ok, will create a different bug for the second pull request. although, second pull request is a pre-req for the functionality in first pull request to fully work.
I will mark this bug as a dependent on the second one.
Thanks
Satender
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 716976 [details]
pull request for contact activity changes to allow adding number to existing contact
this pull request move to another bug 844054.
Attachment #716976 -
Flags: review?(fabrice.desre)
Attachment #716976 -
Flags: review?(alberto.pastor)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 [LOE:M]=3-4 days → u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 [LOE:M]
Whiteboard: u=aganesan@mozilla.com c=sms s=v1.1-sprint-1 [LOE:M] → [LOE:M]
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 715069 [details] [diff] [review]
html link for Pull Request review
Adding stas@ to review l10n stuff added in file apps/sms/locales/sms.en-US.properties
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Comment 16•12 years ago
|
||
Hi Arun! We would need some visuals/specs about this bug in order to check that the PR is working as expected. Could you attach it to this bug? Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(aganesan)
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•12 years ago
|
||
Hi Arun/Casey,
Specifically, one of the comments in PR is around the styles when there is a phone number in the message, Currently there is an 'orange color', from a UX perspective what should be the expected behavior here.
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•12 years ago
|
||
Arun,
please take a look at this screenshot which has phone number highlighted in orange currently.
Comment 19•12 years ago
|
||
Hi Satender,
Despite of your screenshot (I checked that screen as well), I would need the visual from Arun with the HEX of the color in order to check it. We would need this info in order to check that everything works & seems as expected.
Comment 20•12 years ago
|
||
the patch injects DOM nodes dynamically and uses data-l10n-id to localize them.
I don't think it will work in all scenarios with our pre-compilation on production.
I would recommend using l10n.get() to pool the strings instead
Comment 21•12 years ago
|
||
hey guys:
#ff4e00 is the color code. For visual design questions, you can flag :peterla or :patryk — that's where I got this info too.
Cheers,
Arun
Flags: needinfo?(aganesan)
Assignee | ||
Comment 22•12 years ago
|
||
have made the changes to use l10n.get for the 3 localized strings as suggested by Zbigniew. updated pr has the change.
Comment 23•12 years ago
|
||
Dylan:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/toey9cb2vtow2jo/messages-calling_01Mar2013.pdf
I updated the specs here. There should be no title for the prompt (my fault). Please let me know if there are any questions.
(flagging you as needsinfo to make you notice this — is there a better way for doing it in bugzilla?)
Arun
Comment 24•12 years ago
|
||
Dylan:
I stand corrected. I checked with the UX team. It's okay to have a title, but I have update the specs with a new title. Thanks!
Comment 25•12 years ago
|
||
Posting updated specs for further use/reference:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3rl8tdq0y4yg31d/dialer-invocation-in-messages.pdf
Comment 26•12 years ago
|
||
Hi Arun! We have created a new bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=848778 for creating a 'generic' action-menu with a configurable 'Title' and 'Options'. Could you append the info there and take a look? Thanks!
Comment 27•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Arun Balachandran Ganesan [:abc] from comment #23)
> Dylan:
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/toey9cb2vtow2jo/messages-calling_01Mar2013.pdf
Hi Arun, can we make the title of the prompt as the target content, e.g., 745-434-3455 in the figure? Since user may need the information to confirm his action.
>
> I updated the specs here. There should be no title for the prompt (my
> fault). Please let me know if there are any questions.
>
> (flagging you as needsinfo to make you notice this — is there a better way
> for doing it in bugzilla?)
>
> Arun
Flags: needinfo?(aganesan)
Comment 28•12 years ago
|
||
pyang:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inwltmtb2jkh0dr/dialer-invocation-in-messages.pdf
This is the updated specs. Let me know any thoughts you may have. (It's pending UX feedback). I will confirm here once UX has reviewed it. Thanks!
Cheers,
Arun
Flags: needinfo?(aganesan)
Comment 29•12 years ago
|
||
Per partner and release-driver discussions, marking blocking- until all MMS functionality in bug 849867 is complete, allowing it all to be checked-in at once to avoid SMS bustage.
blocking-b2g: leo+ → -
Comment 30•12 years ago
|
||
Borja & Pyang:
If the phone number in the message is one that is already in my contacts, will my mobile recognize that? Thanks!
Arun
Flags: needinfo?(fbsc)
Comment 31•12 years ago
|
||
Currently this feature it's not implemented. We could check if the number it's in the Contacts DB as well, but this would change the behaviour explained in the WF right? Because one number which is tied to a contact, should show only the 'call' action?
Flags: needinfo?(fbsc)
Comment 32•12 years ago
|
||
That's right, Borja. I'm updating my specs to accommodate this scenario. It should show 'call' and 'view contact'. It should also display the contact name instead of the number.
Comment 33•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 34•12 years ago
|
||
Hi Borja,
It may be the case if it's a mobile phone, but not if it is from an office. Recommend to request review for use scenario.
Comment 35•12 years ago
|
||
Restoring leo+ for the non-MMS dependent v1.1 SMS features.
No longer blocks: mms-p1
blocking-b2g: - → leo+
Comment 36•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 37•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Arun Balachandran Ganesan [:abc] from comment #30)
> Borja & Pyang:
>
> If the phone number in the message is one that is already in my contacts,
> will my mobile recognize that? Thanks!
>
> Arun
It's out of the scope of the User Story,
besides a user could want to have the same phone number associated to different contacts
Comment 38•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #724351 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment 39•12 years ago
|
||
Maria:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3rl8tdq0y4yg31d/dialer-invocation-in-messages.pdf
The specs are complete from UX side (and in line with the acceptance criteria listed above) Can you please check ASAP and raise a flag if something needs to be changed?
Thank you!
Cheers,
Arun
Flags: needinfo?(oteo)
Comment 40•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #724374 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(oteo)
Comment 41•12 years ago
|
||
One important thing to highlight:
In case we have several clickable items in a single bubble, evey item should have an indepedent clickable area.
Comment 42•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Arun Balachandran Ganesan [:abc] from comment #39)
> Maria:
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3rl8tdq0y4yg31d/dialer-invocation-in-messages.pdf
>
> The specs are complete from UX side (and in line with the acceptance
> criteria listed above) Can you please check ASAP and raise a flag if
> something needs to be changed?
> Thank you!
>
> Cheers,
> Arun
yes, they are aligned :)
Now Ayman will release a new WF version, just for including in one single document all the SMS US for v1.1 based in your WF and what we agreed with the development team.
Thanks a lot for your work, it's helped us a lot :)
Comment 43•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Maria Angeles Oteo:oteo from comment #41)
> One important thing to highlight:
> In case we have several clickable items in a single bubble, evey item should
> have an indepedent clickable area.
Yes, I just updated the specs with this note.
Thanks!
Comment 44•12 years ago
|
||
Wireframe release:
HTML5_SMS-MMSUserStorySpecifications_20130315_V1.0
**new wireframes**
- SMS with phone number
- Phone number long press options
- Phone number not in contact list options
- SMS with URL
- SMS with email
- Email long press options
**updated wireframes**
- none
**deleted wireframes**
- none
to address this bug specifically refer to page: 5
Attachment #715069 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(fbsc)
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(fabrice)
Attachment #715069 -
Flags: review?(alberto.pastor)
Assignee | ||
Comment 45•12 years ago
|
||
pull request https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/pull/8696
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(fbsc)
Comment 46•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 726024 [details]
new patch based on latest acceptance criteria
Could you take a look to the new Strings? Thanks!
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(l10n)
Comment 47•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 726024 [details]
new patch based on latest acceptance criteria
From my side R+. We need only to have R+ from l10n team and we could merge it! Thanks for your work in SMS App. Soon we will have email management as well!! Thanks! Gracias! ;)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(fbsc) → review+
Comment 48•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 726024 [details]
new patch based on latest acceptance criteria
This patch looks like you're adding 4 strings and using 2? r- based on that.
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(l10n)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 49•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 726024 [details]
new patch based on latest acceptance criteria
removed the 2 strings not needed for this patch, based on l10n feedback. pls review again.
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(l10n)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review-
Comment 50•12 years ago
|
||
This might be TEF or Taipei owning testing here.
Tony - Can you find out who owns this user story?
Flags: needinfo?(tchung)
Flags: in-moztrap?
Comment 51•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jason Smith [:jsmith] from comment #50)
> This might be TEF or Taipei owning testing here.
>
> Tony - Can you find out who owns this user story?
The testing of this US owns to TEF team, they are preparing the test plan for it
Updated•12 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(tchung)
Comment 52•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 726024 [details]
new patch based on latest acceptance criteria
r=me, thanks.
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(stas)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review?(l10n)
Attachment #726024 -
Flags: review+
Updated•12 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 53•12 years ago
|
||
Uplifted commit 69f637108ed2196e873355c417fe876454bd4e88 as:
v1-train: 32b4246938b4b24c957b673eb03604886c2ad0f6
status-b2g18:
--- → fixed
Comment 54•12 years ago
|
||
Updated Acceptance Criteria agreed with UX team and development, so QA team can update their test cases according to it
Attachment #724599 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment 55•12 years ago
|
||
It probably didn't work on v1-train until now that Bug 848778 was uplifted.
Flags: in-moztrap? → in-moztrap+
Comment 56•11 years ago
|
||
Removing the testcase, as it's invalid. We'll rewrite and resubmit.
Flags: in-moztrap+ → in-moztrap?(jhammink)
Updated•11 years ago
|
Attachment mime type: text/plain text/plain → text/x-github-pull-request text/x-github-pull-request
Comment 58•11 years ago
|
||
Flags: in-moztrap?(jhammink) → in-moztrap+
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•