Photo on contacts

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Pedro Machado Santa

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 12:18:21 AM4/30/08
to
Hi all,

Please, please add a way to put photos on contacts! :)

I would appreciate it very much.

Cheers.

Pedro Machado Santa

Ron K.

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 12:23:02 AM4/30/08
to
Pedro Machado Santa keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 12:18 AM :

It is already possible with an extension.
http://nic-nac-project.de/~kaosmos/morecols-en.html
Provides some other contacts data items too, like a birthday field.

--
Ron K.
Who is General Failure, and why is he searching my HDD?
Kernel Restore reported BSOD use by Major Error to msg the enemy!

Bryan Clark

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 3:54:45 PM4/30/08
to
Ron K. wrote:
> Pedro Machado Santa keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 12:18 AM :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please, please add a way to put photos on contacts! :)
>>
>> I would appreciate it very much.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> Pedro Machado Santa
>
> It is already possible with an extension.
> http://nic-nac-project.de/~kaosmos/morecols-en.html
> Provides some other contacts data items too, like a birthday field.
>
I think we should definitely be making this kind of photo field
available by default for contact cards in Thunderbird. Do we have a bug
filed for this already?

A birthday field addition is already in bugzilla (
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13595 ) and marked a TB3
release blocker.

~ Bryan

Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:04:02 PM4/30/08
to dev-apps-t...@lists.mozilla.org
Bryan Clark:

> Ron K. wrote:
>
>> Pedro Machado Santa keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 12:18 AM :
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Please, please add a way to put photos on contacts! :)
>>>
>>> I would appreciate it very much.
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>> Pedro Machado Santa
>>>
>> It is already possible with an extension.
>> http://nic-nac-project.de/~kaosmos/morecols-en.html
>> Provides some other contacts data items too, like a birthday field.
>>
>>
> I think we should definitely be making this kind of photo field
> available by default for contact cards in Thunderbird. Do we have a bug
> filed for this already?
>
>

Is there any standard for such fields like personal photographs? Are
they exchangeable, shareable and redistributable in some form? Like in
VC cards and some address book standards?


--
Regards

Signer: Eddy Nigg, StartCom Ltd. <http://www.startcom.org>
Jabber: star...@startcom.org <xmpp:star...@startcom.org>
Blog: Join the Revolution! <http://blog.startcom.org>
Phone: +1.213.341.0390

Ron K.

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:15:54 PM4/30/08
to
Bryan Clark keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 3:54 PM :

The photo option in the extension is experimental, according to the
notes in the web page. It does have a file browser function and I
found the image scaling a bit rough.

As for an RFE bug, I will look into that.

Bryan Clark

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:22:25 PM4/30/08
to
Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) wrote:
> Bryan Clark:
>> Ron K. wrote:
>>> Pedro Machado Santa keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 12:18 AM :
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Please, please add a way to put photos on contacts! :)
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate it very much.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>> Pedro Machado Santa
>>> It is already possible with an extension.
>>> http://nic-nac-project.de/~kaosmos/morecols-en.html
>>> Provides some other contacts data items too, like a birthday field.
>>>
>> I think we should definitely be making this kind of photo field
>> available by default for contact cards in Thunderbird. Do we have a
>> bug filed for this already?
>>
>
> Is there any standard for such fields like personal photographs? Are
> they exchangeable, shareable and redistributable in some form? Like in
> VC cards and some address book standards?
>
>
VCard has a type like this in it's standard; see rfc2426 [1] and search
for "3.1.4 PHOTO Type Definition". The field provides either a binary
inline photo or a uri to a public photo.

I'm not aware of any other kind of standards.

~ Bryan

[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt

Ron K.

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:25:12 PM4/30/08
to
Bryan Clark keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 4:22 PM :

Reference your Bug query, Yes there is an open bug filed in 2002
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=119459

Do you want this nominated as Wanted for Tb 3.0 ?

Ron K.

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:31:38 PM4/30/08
to
Bryan Clark keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 4:22 PM :

In regard to the Vcard there is bug files to bring Abook up to full RFC
Support.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29106

The bug has three open bug dependencies and one blocking bug.

Bryan Clark

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:36:35 PM4/30/08
to
Yes, I think this would be a good addition to the wanted for TB3 list.


Ron K.

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 4:47:56 PM4/30/08
to
Bryan Clark keyboarded, On 4/30/2008 4:36 PM :

Done, nominated for Tb3.

gNeandr

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 5:34:03 PM4/30/08
to
On 30.04.2008 22:31 » Ron K.« wrote:

> In regard to the Vcard there is bug files to bring Abook up to full RFC
> Support.
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29106
>
> The bug has three open bug dependencies and one blocking bug.

Ron, could nominate bug 29106 also for TB3? At least to support UID as
stated with rfc2426 3.6.7 UID Type Definition :
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2426#section-3.1.4

Thanks
Günter

Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 6:48:57 PM4/30/08
to Bryan Clark, dev-apps-t...@lists.mozilla.org
Bryan Clark:

>> Is there any standard for such fields like personal photographs? Are
>> they exchangeable, shareable and redistributable in some form? Like in
>> VC cards and some address book standards?
>>
>>
>>
> VCard has a type like this in it's standard; see rfc2426 [1] and search
> for "3.1.4 PHOTO Type Definition". The field provides either a binary
> inline photo or a uri to a public photo.
>
> I'm not aware of any other kind of standards.
>
>
Good, I guess that's enough. Thanks for saving me the legwork!

Joshua Cranmer

unread,
Apr 30, 2008, 8:40:51 PM4/30/08
to
Bryan Clark wrote:
> I think we should definitely be making this kind of photo field
> available by default for contact cards in Thunderbird. Do we have a bug
> filed for this already?

Should adding photos into the address book make it into TB, then I
nominate that the status quo achieved in
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20417 (Support for X-Face
header) be reconsidered. At 52 votes, this bug is tied for 39th place in
the most-wanted-TB-bugs; it also represents parity with competition.
Thoughts?

> A birthday field addition is already in bugzilla (
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13595 ) and marked a TB3
> release blocker.

At 107 votes, this bug is the 11th-most-wanted-TB-bug, it is already
handled in backend, and is therefore quite amenable to being a TB3 blocker.

Karsten Düsterloh

unread,
May 1, 2008, 11:58:46 AM5/1/08
to
Joshua Cranmer aber hob zu reden an und schrieb:

> Should adding photos into the address book make it into TB,

Well, storing photos is probably not a problem.
Sending them with each and every mail or posting surely is.

> then I nominate that the status quo achieved in
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20417 (Support for X-Face
> header) be reconsidered. At 52 votes, this bug is tied for 39th place in
> the most-wanted-TB-bugs; it also represents parity with competition.

I'm not so convinced that this is something what needs to be available
in the core, and in fact extensions exist which provide this.

I may be old-fashioned by now, using plaintext and Usenet ;-), but I
acknowledge that times (and especially bandwidth *g*) have changed...

> Thoughts?

Just as a reminder: while "X-Face" as an X- header adheres to the RfCs
at least, "Face" does not and should never be part of the core.


Karsten
--
Feel free to correct my English. :)

Bryan W Clark

unread,
May 1, 2008, 12:20:55 PM5/1/08
to
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> Bryan Clark wrote:
>> I think we should definitely be making this kind of photo field
>> available by default for contact cards in Thunderbird. Do we have a bug
>> filed for this already?
>
> Should adding photos into the address book make it into TB, then I
> nominate that the status quo achieved in
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20417 (Support for X-Face
> header) be reconsidered. At 52 votes, this bug is tied for 39th place
> in the most-wanted-TB-bugs; it also represents parity with
> competition. Thoughts?
After reading the bug and the wikipedia page [1] I'm not convinced that
this would be better in core than as an extension. There doesn't seem
to be much support for it in any major email client. Given it's low
support it would require a decent amount of UI work to explain to people
the situation. (i.e. choose a picture to send out with your mails, if
someone didn't see your picture it's because their client doesn't
support... pictures, these kinds of pictures)

I do think that we could provide much better ways to get this kind of
extension. For instance if thunderbird was scanning mails for the
X-Face header in mails and when found offered to open the add-ons window
with extensions that support it. That would probably take a bit of work
in a lot of areas. (just an idea)

~ Bryan

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Face

Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)

unread,
May 1, 2008, 12:41:41 PM5/1/08
to kd-u...@tprac.de, dev-apps-t...@lists.mozilla.org
Karsten Düsterloh:

> I may be old-fashioned by now, using plaintext and Usenet ;-)

Perhaps you are ;-)

In any case, this would somehow match to some extend the Web
2.0...errr...Mail 2.0 era, coming on par with capabilities of many IMs
and such. I think this is the stuff which will start to make a
difference and make TB more leading and unique. Or are you going to
support it only after MS has it in Outlook? Lets try to get a little bit
beyond the lame mail image...

Dan Mosedale

unread,
May 2, 2008, 8:49:02 PM5/2/08
to
Bryan W Clark wrote:

> After reading the bug and the wikipedia page [1] I'm not convinced that
> this would be better in core than as an extension. There doesn't seem to
> be much support for it in any major email client.

I assert that we do want something like this in core, because messages
and conversations do intimately involve people. If the only stumbling
block is lack of a widely deployed, usable standard, then we should work
with other players in the messaging space to figure out what the right
standards-based solution is. An argument could, for example, be made
that anyone who includes a vCard with a photo in their message should
get that photo displayed somewhere automagically, and that maybe we
should just push for that rather than worrying about X-Face.

> Given it's low support
> it would require a decent amount of UI work to explain to people the
> situation. (i.e. choose a picture to send out with your mails, if
> someone didn't see your picture it's because their client doesn't
> support... pictures, these kinds of pictures)

During the years when IM was bootstrapping itself, how did they deal?
Or did they start out with all of them having buddy icons. While it's
not ideal to leave the question you mention unanswered, I don't think
it's a showstopper either.

Dan

Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)

unread,
May 2, 2008, 8:54:00 PM5/2/08
to Dan Mosedale, dev-apps-t...@lists.mozilla.org
+1 from me.

Dan Mosedale:


> I assert that we do want something like this in core, because messages
> and conversations do intimately involve people. If the only stumbling
> block is lack of a widely deployed, usable standard, then we should work
> with other players in the messaging space to figure out what the right
> standards-based solution is. An argument could, for example, be made
> that anyone who includes a vCard with a photo in their message should
> get that photo displayed somewhere automagically, and that maybe we
> should just push for that rather than worrying about X-Face.
>

--

ovidiu

unread,
May 3, 2008, 7:45:03 PM5/3/08
to
Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) wrote:
> +1 from me.
>
> Dan Mosedale:
>> I assert that we do want something like this in core, because
>> messages and conversations do intimately involve people. If the only
>> stumbling block is lack of a widely deployed, usable standard, then
>> we should work with other players in the messaging space to figure
>> out what the right standards-based solution is. An argument could,
>> for example, be made that anyone who includes a vCard with a photo in
>> their message should get that photo displayed somewhere
>> automagically, and that maybe we should just push for that rather
>> than worrying about X-Face.
>>
>
+1 also
while I was thinking that a "contact hub" may eventually have to deal
with several different images corresponding to different identities in
different networks (people may use more than 1 identity and image in
various situations). Now, would that make Tb AB a leader .. ?

Ron K.

unread,
May 3, 2008, 10:46:21 PM5/3/08
to
Dan Mosedale keyboarded, On 5/2/2008 8:49 PM :

> Bryan W Clark wrote:
>
>> After reading the bug and the wikipedia page [1] I'm not convinced that
>> this would be better in core than as an extension. There doesn't seem to
>> be much support for it in any major email client.
>
> I assert that we do want something like this in core, because messages
> and conversations do intimately involve people. If the only stumbling
> block is lack of a widely deployed, usable standard, then we should
> work with other players in the messaging space to figure out what the
> right standards-based solution is. An argument could, for example, be
> made that anyone who includes a vCard with a photo in their message
> should get that photo displayed somewhere automagically, and that
> maybe we should just push for that rather than worrying about X-Face.
>

The MoreFunctionsForAddressbook extension has an experimental
implementation of photo support. It permits use of full color images
such as JPEG that are stored locally. It added a Photo tab to Abook
Properties and included a edit/insert button. IIRC, the X-FACE is
limited to a 64 color pallet, not up to photo realistic expectations of
users.

>
> During the years when IM was bootstrapping itself, how did they deal?
> Or did they start out with all of them having buddy icons. While it's
> not ideal to leave the question you mention unanswered, I don't think
> it's a showstopper either.
>
> Dan

IIRC, AOL was using small bitmaps @ around 64x64 and some were preloaded
with AIM. Many sites popped up with AIM Buddy Icon Packs after.
Before that it was more like IRC, Screen Name : .......... The Buddy
Icons had other uses including the Buddy List which then needed less
screen real estate.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages