In Notes 8.5.3, you now have much more capability in Recent Contacts.

Fred's problem with the CC field can be avoided by choosing in the Contacs preferences to not add recipients in the CC field (or in the ini with DisableDPABCCProcessing=1) or it can be pumped up to only allow senders to be added to recent contacts (a choice in preferences or set in ini as DisableDPABCCandToProcessing=1).

My client site uses 8.5.2, so we can only get DisableDPABCCProcessing. I think that 852FP3 might allow the tighter restriction, but as our deployment is already underway, we won't be going there.

So, can you explain why Try-Catch-Finally is better than the current system? If the reason is that you're used to TCF or that everyone else uses TCF, I don't know that it merits a change.

That said, you could always simply write all your LotusScript agents in Java. The "Java" in Notes is not really Java, but more like re-worded LotusScript and you get your TCF blocks.

No, it's not a "similar" mail. He wants to add functionality so that if you forward any email, it checks the recipients of the received email against the recipients to whom you are forwarding the email.

This would only help if someone emailed it to your manager and you, with your manager then forwarding it to you as well as. It wouldn't help if two managers who received the same message from someone else both chose to forward it to you.

I think the effort to add this functionality would far exceed the value as people will still forward things to you multiple times when you're not in the same recipient list that they're in.

I absolutely don't understand the dialog when I paste elements. The outcome seems almost random sometimes.

As a developer, I don't want administrators just deciding to always use that option and absolutely replace every time. When I mark something as prohibit, I mean it (because I do check after I paste, since it invariably does not do what I wanted).

Disagree. When you mark items as prohibit refresh/replace or specify a different template, you make a conscious decision for that specific design element. An absolute replace ignores those decisisons without examining each. I see allowing someone to do an absolute replace as more risk of ruining an implemented design than saving time for the administrator in not having to un-check those design elements. If there were some kind of interface that identified which specific elements were being replaced with an "Are you sure", I might be more comfortable with it.

How common a problem is this? Usually the only time we've had such design elements, they belonged to specific developers who needed an agent to do maintenance on the data and the agent wasn't in the template.

So, since it's absolute, would it also remove private design elements that are not included in the template?

I've been learning Java and really don't like Try-Catch blocks. They honestly look ugly. Why should you have to add the extra lines to show where you're trying and catching instead of just using LotusScript's style where you can put in one On Error line?

I voted "No opinion", which anyone can check by clicking on "Voting".

I'm a developer and while I understand them and used them once or twice to make sure I understood them, I never use either of them and have no opinion on it. I suspect most regular users don't use them either.

If you'd prefer, I'll vote to demote because I think it not used by enough users to warrant the change.

I've never use them, so I can't vote in favor of this idea.

I don't use those much either (I never use stationery or rules) and use my folders extensively, sometimes not having enough space to display them without allowing the top part to scroll off the top of the screen.

So, I'm with Zoltan. If you want something "stickied", it should have a default, but be changeable by the user.

If you do it using AJAX and ReadViewEntries, I think you find that data retrieval is very fast.

I think it's a good idea, though I wonder about how it would pick the entries to display. Should it always be the last modified X number of entries? Or last X created? Or first/last X items by view sort order?

I think you could build the contents using XML ReadViewEntries (via AJAX, for example) and avoid using @DBLookup at all.

Great idea!

Starrow, the information is displayed if you look at the view properties in the Designer client (info tab). The display is that information is not updated "live". That is, if someone accesses the view or re-indexes the view while I have the Info tab of the View's properties open, the date/time displayed remains the same even though the value is different. In fact, changing tabs doesn't allow it to update either. Only if you switch from the list of views to a different design element list and come back, prompting the Designer client to refresh the data.

To test how this works with the last modified date, open the list of views in your Designer client and have a friend update one of the views. You will note that in YOUR client, the date/time is not updated until you "refresh" the list (just as adding a document to a view one someone else's machine doesn't display in the view on your own machine until you refresh the view).

So, despite the fact that the last indexed or last accessed data might change very frequently, the display of that information would only be updated when the user "refreshes" the list of design elements.

Ah, yes. It does look like InputBox violates the standard. All other functions seem to return an actual variant of the DataType rather than a variant containing the DataType. Changing my vote.

Chr returns a Variant of DataType 8 (String). Chr$ returns a String.
Date returns that value as a Variant of DataType 7 (Date/Time). Date$ returns that value as a String.
Dir returns a Variant of DataType 8 (String), and Dir$ returns a String.
Error returns a Variant, and Error$ returns a String.
Left returns a Variant of DataType 8 (a String), and Left$ returns a String.
et cetera, et cetera

Why not use the NotesUIWorkspace method, Prompt, instead, which already has this behaviour?

I think that since neither Lotus Notes itself, nor LotusScript, is included, that the odds are significantly againt W3 Schools decided to include Xpages, which not even most Notes shops use.

Mark, if you don't want it in every database, put it in the Admin/Developer's toolbox database:

%REM
Agent Find doc by UNID
Created Jun 15, 2011 by David Navarre
Description: Find a document by the UNID or NoteID
Modified from code by Vlad Sh
%END REM
Option Public
Option Declare

Sub Initialize
' Ask the user which server and database, then UNID
Dim ws As New NotesUIWorkspace
Dim session As New NotesSession
Dim currentdb As NotesDatabase
Dim db As NotesDatabase
Dim doc As NotesDocument
Dim server As String
Dim filepath As String
Dim UNID As String
Dim msg As String

Set currentdb = session.Currentdatabase
server = InputBox ( "Which server?", "Server", currentdb.Server )
filepath = InputBox ( "Enter the file path (blank to cancel):", "Filepath", currentdb.Filepath )
If filepath = "" Then Exit Sub

Set db = session.Getdatabase(server, filepath, false)
Call db.Open("","")

UNID = InputBox ( "What is the UNID sought?", "Enter UNID", "" )
If UNID = "" Then Exit Sub

Set doc = db.Getdocumentbyunid(UNID)
If doc Is Nothing Then
msg = "No document with UNID = " & UNID & " in the chosen database)"
MessageBox msg, 48, "Not found"
Else
Call ws.EditDocument (False, doc,,,, False)
End If

End Sub

@9, sometimes, when I had to sign my designs multiple times over the course of a day, I ended up simply staying logged in with the signing ID to avoid that problem, which is 'non-optimal'.

You make a trade-off on performance between a single index for the view or multiple indexes, just as you currently do for views for which you have "Click on column header to sort". I'm wondering if allowing this would just be a matter of programmically accessing those alternate sorts....

Unfortunately, I think changing the response to arrow keys would actually confuse users. Their most familiar environment is likely to be their web browser and this is exactly how the browser reacts once you change focus to those fields. Perhaps the solution is to take away using the arrow keys to move from one field to the next, as the browser doesn't move you to the next field without either hitting tab or using your mouse.

Other field types that react similarly: list box and combo box....

Have you thought about doing it via DXL? I just searched using "design element lotus notes refresh" on dogpile.com and found:

{ Link }

I already knew that design elements were "notes", but didn't realize that is was possible to could display them in a view:

{ Link }

So, I have doubts about it the "absolutely no way" part, but I've never thought about trying it before, so you could be right.

I also have doubts that the open source Java community is disciplined, but I have no experience with that community yet, so have to defer to your analysis.

Mark, the trouble is that you're proposing that it be available to everyone, not just your own, very structured group. I would be willing to bet that most Notes development teams are not tightly controlled and that in many places, the recipe would provide the disaster that I'm imagining.

As such, third-party tools for would be a more appropriate source for this. Teams that can use it would buy it, but the great unwashed masses would avoid it.

I don't think this is a good idea because any time someone updates a design element in 'the commons', the server would have to either immediately recompile every piece of code that uses it or would have to recompile on the fly when those agents/actions/events get called.

What if the user changing the commons doesn't have designer rights in every database? What if the change which seems minor to the one changing the commons is actually major in one or more databases? The "error report" showing all affected designs and respective errors could actually be a huge challenge to create.

Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

I wonder how much overhead on re-indexing a view would be required if you were allowed to select which sorted column to use for the "Get". I think it would do wonders to reduce the number of views used in databases, but might have a terrible performance impact.

I wouldn't include the servername field for the template, but that's me.

Bill, if the users have Manager access and don't know what the ACL does, they shouldn't have Manager access. Why would they need Manager if they aren't going to edit the ACL? Why are you using individual user names instead of groups in the ACL? Why aren't you worried that they could look at Replication History (and delete it by mistake?)

I like removing steps, so voting for this....

Would it also make sense to have an option to mail all who rejected the meeting request, or am I getting into overkill?