AdamS

I can't believe I let this one slip through. The ability to export different data types at the same time. Presently we can only select PDF or Original or PST, having the ability to select multiple types would be fantastic. I understand the software may only physically be capable of doing them one at a time due to the limitations inherent with trying to create these data sets, but it would still be nice for us to be able to have that automated.

yeah IWR was what I meant...

Can you import an .icw file from 1.7.x to 1.8.x?

I have a client feature request They would like the ability to 'lock' a tag set so no more items can be added, no items can be removed, and the tag itself cannot be changed/deleted etc. The idea here being that at the end of the review the lawyers 'lock' the tagged data they will be relying on and then when the trial comes around they know that the data will be exactly as it was when they locked it. I'm thinking a good way to implement this (should you choose to) would be within the user permissions, we could create a special user account that has the ability to lock the tags (only lock) and then the only way they can be unlocked is by me (the host) by logging in via Intella rather than connect and then we could unlock if required. It would also be vital that this be fully transparent in the 'activity logs'. Also another request from the same lawyers, the ability to create a very basic user who can only see the 'search' tab when they log in and have some reduced functionality. The reason behind this is on occasion there may be orders to allow an opposing side to view the data. In these cases they don't want their own activity log to be visible and they may not even want the tags to be visible. This way we could have a reduced basic user log in to the same data set, not have access to the activity log, and not have the ability to see tag names. The assumption here is that there are items tagged as privileged which they want not only the content hidden from these users, but the very existence of the tag name as well. Perhaps the way to approach this would be to give greater customisation to us when we create the users so we can dictate what parts of the dashboard they see, can they export, can they tag etc etc.

Looks great, also liking the idea of custodian's being introduced.

Ah okay, I understand. I did read the manual but misunderstood. My brain has been overused lately

I'm not sure if this is a user error or something else. I select 'include' for a specific date range on sent and received, select 'inlcude' on type for emails, then conduct a search by sender email address. I'm seeing numerous emails outside the included date range. It doesn't seem to matter which order I apply the filters once I click on the ball all emails regardless of date are shown. I'm having to click search and find the intersecting circle for the emails in the date range. Is this by design?

If time allows you are always better off with a fresh index in my opinion....not sure what the official word is but that's my preference. No worries about conflicts or unforeseen glitches etc when you do it that way.

ahhhhh it's the stars! I already liked the post and now have given it 5 stars as well.

Is the vote meant to be the follow button?

While I'm here, I had a thought last night which may help everyone with regards to our wishlist/requests etc. This is more of a functional request for the forums here to assist the Intella people with gauging the popularity of our requests, and also an organisational change to the layout of the forums to make it easier to see. Create a new sub forum under the two main forum headers for Functionality Requests (ie one under 'Intella' and another under 'Intella Connect'. Have each function request made by us the users as a new topic, and most importantly add a "yes please" button (or similar) to the bottom of the first post. This button would allow other users to simply vote "yes" to any of the changes requested, without the need to actually post anything and the' button may help you prioritise our requests based on popularity. Of course discussion about a request can still carry on but that little button conveys instantly the popularity of the request. The advantage here is that by simply viewing the first post the Admin's can see how many of Intella's users think the request is a good idea, and also rather than having to scroll through several Wishlist threads to try and find the posts that are actually relevant, you only have to look at the first post of each new thread to get the relevant information. It would also make it much easier for you and us to scroll back through feature requests and hopefully avoid any duplication. And lastly when/if you do implement a change based on a request you could go back and change the colour of that thread to red or blue, some quick visual clue so that as we look at the threads we can very quickly see which changes have been implemented. This is purely a warm fuzzy so we know you are listening to us

I second Jasons request for the ability to expand the search parameters, I really like the idea, but I would point out that the 'only' option would still be required when selecting the 'from', 'cc' or 'bcc' fields to have the option of selecting those with only a specific recipient. Presumably you would then have the ability to add numerous search criteria with that 'drop down connector' method? So emails FROM --> Sent BEFORE -->WITH attachments --> Containing the keyword? Something like that which we currently need to use the 'include' 'exclude' filters for could be build as a specific search? I should point out that on odd ocassions (not frequently but it does happen), intella's include/exclude options don't do what they should. I have had the situation where I search a keyword, then include only communications but still have PDF and other document types showing up in the results. Perhaps the options to build custom searches in this manner would alleviate these issues?

The ability to isolate emails involving specific users, sort of like this thread but a bit more refined. http://community.vound-software.com/index.php?/topic/235-email-between-individuals/?hl=address&do=findComment&comment=1175 Using the search fields 'to' 'from' etc I can find emails between users, but lets say I want to find all emails that only involve 3 different users. Currently I have to conduct several different searches to first isolate all emails sent by A, then by B then by C, then all emails received by A, B and C, then find the intersecting emails, then sort by email addresses and manually find the ones that only involve the email addresses of interest. While this process works it's a little clumsy and considering Intella already has all the information stored away for us I was hoping there was a way we could put that to work. The simplist way I could see this being implemented would be a simple tickbox option next to the 'from' 'to' 'cc' 'bcc' etc under the search 'Options' button that says 'ONLY'. If we tick that box next to one of the fields, then enter a name/email address to search by, Intella would then return emails which ONLY contained that one specific name/address. Then it would be very simple and quick to find all the emails sent by a specific user to a specific user that didn't involve any other email addresses!

I for one would not like to see all fields selected by default, this would throw up a lot of extra information that wouldn't be needed in many cases. This seems more like an awareness issue than anything, if you have 'pop ups' and 'warnings' every time we do something it's going to start to look like a dodgy web site

Can you find emails at that time/date range sent with VCF (contact) attachments?

Small functional wish for a scroll bar for the left hand side of the preview window when opening up an item. I'll attempt to explain, if you enable the option to have the num keys used for tags with the maximum number (9) then double click on an email it opens in a smaller window with all 9 tags visible on the left hand side of this preview window. What this does is force some of the other options out of view (print, save, open in native application etc) and unless you maximize the window you can't see/access these options. If there was a scroll bar available when this happens it would enable us to scroll up to access these options, or better yet have the default view keep these options visible and the option to scroll down if we want to as the option to redact etc which are at the bottom are far less likely to be used. Does this make sense?

Lukasz I was thinking more along the lines of giving some control over when and if to search children items when filters are applied. Obviously if no filters are applied everything will be searched, but having that option would give some control over how the search is applied. While the standard way will give you want you want it requires a firstly the awareness of how the search is behaving, as I suspect many people would just assume that the search will encompass the children of seleted items, and secondly it requires and extra few steps. Current process to search for children items of emails as described above in my option 2. However much faster and simpler would be: Set filter for applicable date range Set type to include emails Search keywords/list (tick box to apply to children) Finsihed!! search results encompass emails and their children. What that should give us is search hits where emails or their attachments (from within the applicable date range only) are shown.

Just on PF1's request above, wouldn't it be very simple to just have the figures in the size column tallied automatically and display that figure next to the 'selected items' number already displayed top left of the preview pane? I realise that after export due to weird things happening the actual size may differ, but at least this would be a very quick and easy way to give a good indication of possible data set size and would require nothing more than a simple formula to tally up a column with data already displayed. PF1 until something like this is implemented the easiest way I can figure out is to have the set you are interested in highlighted, right click and export table as CSV. You can then use the normal formula methods within Excel to tally up the size column. Not ideal I know but it's fairly quick and will give a good indication of what final size of export may be like.

I've been giving this some thought lately, and sadly as it happens it kept me from sleeping last night. If you are reviewing emails only, then simply turn off the tag family, that way you are not tagging email signatures, attachments etc, however in the final export you will still retain any children of the tagged emails as they are embedded items and always come out with the parent in the export. With regards to duplicates I deal on a case by case basis, generally unless the client wants to know how many other people have seen or been copied into an email chain I will always leave out tagging duplicates. If you are reviewing a mix of documents and emails I would still leave the tag family option disabled. Once you have finished the review then you go back to the tagged items, highlight them all and select 'show parents' you can then tag any parent emails that are applicable for the documents (if they were attachments). You may also want to consider unchecking the 'index content embedded in documents' option. If I understand correctly this won't effect emails as the attachments and indeed the documents themselves are still indexed making the text searchable, however it means the pictures will not be indexed individually. I'm finding myself using this option more and more dealing with documents as there is generally a lot of clutter which I'm not necessarily interested in.

Certainly it would be great to have that in Connect as well, but I'm talking about creating a timeline report that can be exported as a stand alone thing to give to a client. Currently after review there is usually a select amount of relevant emails, it could be 20 or it could be 200. They are given copies of these emails either individually or as part of a HTML/PDF report depending on their preferences. If we could add to that list a timeline report which shows them all the relevant emails with that lovely graphic and live clickable links....that's what I'm hoping for. Most of my clients are lawyers and the visual impact of them being able to present something like that in court cannot be understated, not to mention for me to show clients when I am pitching our services.

I'm going to revisit this wish until I wear you guys down Please tell me if it's not possible so I can leave you alone, but I really can't stress how many of my clients ask for it and just how useful it would be. The timeline preview pane is fantastic, one of the most visually useful tools for quickly and easily seeing who's emailing who, however the current export to png functionality is really only useful for a handful of emails, say up to 20, before the size of the picture becomes too wide to be of any use. Is it possible to have the functionality to export the timeline to an interactive webpage? What would be perfect would be something that visually looks identical to the timeline preview in Intella (very clean and easy to read) that also incorporates the live links to the individual emails just as we can do from within Intella. I'd go a step further and say if it's possible to retain the other functions as well (scroll bar to increase/decrease timeline size, options and legend). Maybe this is not possible in HTML but would be possible in Java or some other clever platform....but I just can't stress enough how much I want this functionality Then of course the logical extension is the include timeline capability for other file types as well. As you can guess I'm messing with timelines at the moment and really not seeing a whole lot out there that does them in a way that impresses me.

When viewing information in the Details pane currently any information that extends outside of the current column size is hidden from view until the column is expanded manually. It would be great if we could have some small control over that, for example in some cases it's easier to view/navigate when the column extends by row size rather than column width. Let's say I have the tags column exposed and due to grouping or what ever reason each item has multiple tags, say 10. currently to view all the tags we have to make the column very wide, this appears a bit messy when trying to quickly ascertain the tags applied. If we had the option to display the tags column with one tag per line, and have the row increase in height accordingly (much like text wrap behaves in Excel) this would be much easier on the eye when dealing with items with multiple tags. A view option to change this behaviour as required was what I had in mind. Also on tag behaviour the ability to pre-define tags would be fantastic. I'm thinking specifically where we want to take advantage of the new parent/child tag ability. Let's say I have 10,000 documents from 10 different vendors, and further I also know that these documents will be broken up into the following types: Emails Financial Documents Memos Invoices Receipts Payments If we could create the 10 parent tags and those 6 other tags from the outset then alter the tagging behaviour slightly, so we are previewing a document and we click 'tag' then the dialog box could open with the parent tags and child tags already visible, we simply check the box next to the parent tag we want and the same next to the child tag and it's done. Fast and simple and means we don't have to retype the child tags each time we are working within a new parent tag set. Also even when working with the documents if we decide to create a new child tag 'Report' there could be a simple option to tell Intella if we want this new tag under the parent or child section.

A couple of cosmetic wishes that would be nice. 1- The ability to completely hide/close the pane with the coloured balls or boxes, thus using all screen real estate for the preview pane. 2- The ability to resize all panes the same way we can resize columns and rows in excel docs, mouse click and drag so to speak.

Option 2 will give you the correct result Phil, I tested that on a small subset of data before posting it. I understand that as a forensic practitioner we need to be somewhat 'mistrustful' of software in order to verify the findings, but I would encourage you to test the second method listed with the method you used to see if/how the results vary. It could shed some valuable light on the process for myself and other users if we are getting different results.

There are a couple of different ways you can do this Phil, both have their issues but should give you what you need. The easiest way is to run the date filter and keyword search as normal, then go to the type facet, highlight everything and use the include option. The downside to this is that you will get any attachment with the keywords listed and the date range filter won't really have any effect due to the many different dates contained in most documents (edited, created, printed, last save etc). This way you will likely have many false positives. A more accurate way I think, and this is assuming you are only interested in attachments to emails sent/received within the proscribed date range. Use the include option to select the date range then select emails only and click search to show all emails from the proscribed date range. Now you have to tag the results then clear all the searches and settings, this will clear the email only issue you are having. Now select the tag you just created and click search to show all results, highlight all the results and select 'show children'. You should now have a ball for the emails from the date range and ball with all the children. Highlight both and run your keyword list. You should now have a search that encompasses both emails and their attachments from the required date range. Edit: on reflection it would be a worthy update if the search functionality had the option to 'include email children' in a search where the filter has been set to show only emails, maybe a simple tickbox option somewhere?