Message sender name truncated after four characters in Messages overview screen

[nofishonfriday]

Checklist

• I can reproduce the bug with the latest version given here.
• I made sure that there are no existing issues - open or closed - to which I could contribute my information.
• I made sure that there are no existing discussions - open or closed - to which I could contribute my information.
• I have read the FAQs inside the app (Menu -> About -> FAQs) and my problem isn't listed.
• I have taken the time to fill in all the required details. I understand that the bug report will be dismissed otherwise.
• This issue contains only one bug.
• I have read and understood the contribution guidelines.

Affected app version

1.7.0

Affected Android/Custom ROM version

Android 12 / LineageOS 19

Affected device model

Samsung Galaxy S4 mini

How did you install the app?

F-Droid / IzzyOnDroid

Steps to reproduce the bug

1. Open incoming/overview Messages screen

Expected behavior

Messages sender names are displayed untruncated.

Actual behavior

Messages sender names are truncated after 4 characters.
In comparison, in the phones stock Messages app the messages sender names are displayed untruncated, that's why I consider the truncation a bug (particularly after only 4 characters).

Screenshots/Screen recordings

Additional information

If my memory doesn't fail me, I think it's a rather recent change in behaviour.

Thought: maybe the combination of (nowadays) tiny display size (S4 mini) and having set the app's fontsize to extra large may play a role.

[naveensingh]

How long is the full sender name?

In comparison, in the phones stock Messages app the messages sender names are displayed untruncated

That is expected if those apps are using normal font size and Fossify Messages is set to use large.

[nofishonfriday]

Thanks for the quick reply (as so often).

How long is the full sender name?

In this case 11 characters incl. whitespace.

That is expected if those apps are using normal font size and Fossify Messages is set to use large.

I now tested Quik which displays the sender names also untruncated with largest fontsize (well except 'super' which is gigantic).

The issue for me is that for some senders' names in my address book I use the same name prefix which is 7 characters long (incl. whitespace), these are indistinguishable now, because truncated to the same first 4 characters.
And I need large fontsize because of vision impaired.

As said, I'm not totally sure, but I'm rather positive that the truncation after 4 characters just started rather recently (like this the app is rather unusable for me, see above and I do use it for some time now), or do you think that's not possible, because there wasn't a code change in this area for a long time?

[naveensingh]

You are probably affected by the design change in #558. The truncation is definitely a result of small screen + large font size + small screen. I'm thinking what can be done to increase the available width for the primary text view without reverting that change.

What date format are you using? Are conversations that are recent and only display the time (no date) also affected?

[nofishonfriday]

Here for comparison how it looks in Quik (with large fontsize set):

Date format in Fossify Messages is set to "15 February 2023".

Are conversations that are recent and only display the time (no date) also affected?

I don't have any currently, sorry.
Will report back when I do.

edit:
Changing date format to "15.02.2023" starts truncation after 8 characters, i.e. I see one char after my common 7 chars name prefix, that's kind of useable. :)

[nofishonfriday]

@naveensingh

Are conversations that are recent and only display the time (no date) also affected?

Just got a new message and in this case, no.
Maybe that tricked me, thinking there was a change in the app, because usually I delete messages immediately after having read.
So after all, if sender names of recent messages are not truncated (as is), that's quite fine actually.
For older ones being truncated (when date shows, what this report is about) it would be nice if it could be improved, but not that critical actually.