Hi Sebastian, *, Sebastian Spaeth schrieb: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 22:59:37 +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier <damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de> wrote:
>> What You as an individual do use or don't *must not* be a criterium >> for UI and feature changes. Even and especially not because You are >> a software developer! > Hi Friedrich, > this thread already became bigger than I ever intended, and I heard > that the state of the statusbar is a regular flamefest. I don't want > to awake any flames or add more fuel. I guess this is not limited on the status bar but on UI/feature questions in general.. And I'm glad to see this topic beeing one of high interest and not going down in a flame. >> over users shoulders. And be assured: *Every* bloddy feature you hid >> anywhere in the UI has a user(base) using it. That's more valid for >> the "one click available" as in the status bar. My following statements are not intended to express bad estimation of your good ideas.. :o)) > All I am going to add is: "which user prefers single-clicks for some > status bar items and double-clicks on others, while some are not > clickable at all?". One who has been told / has learned to do so and doesn't bother on any theory of userfriendly UI :o)).. > "Which user wants to launch dialogs when clicking > on apparently empty areas in the statusbar?" see above.. > and finally "which user wants 2 separators between icon areas that are > really empty?" One who has learned to (double-)click the fourth area will be confused what to do now. > "which user wants exclamation marks for default situations rather than > suitably subtle icons that show modified doc status?" :-) Again: see above. ("You told me to click the exclamation mark - where should I click now?"). > Some things can be universally be improved, other should remain > customizable. I do know that there is a reason and a proponent behind > all those items. The reason and proponent is the less important thing. The more important is to change/disturb a step by step learned workflow. Changes of this kind need very good reasons - valid for the user - and many things accompanying to support the change. You laugh about the examples above? I don't. That's bitter truth out there. >> The only proper way to have a "Sebastian Spaeth" UI of LibreOffice I >> see: >> Convince your developer collegues to build an UI framework which >> allows such changes without affecting other users. :o)) > Ohh, but there is much of that possible already. I was able to make > myself much happier with a few lines of editing of the statusbar.xml > definition. That are good news! Is it a big deal to make all that already possible available in a framework to be fed from outside? Thinking of skins and configuration sets? > I am not sure what the right approach to finding good UI is. I > therefore defer those designs to others. I only know when something > bothers me so much that I really want it changed :). I'm in very favor of that - as long as I have the possibility to stick with the old behaviour for my clients - and for myself. :o)) For this reason I'm advocating a separate UI-feature framework over and over again. In short words: Changing UI has wide reaching consequences and this has to be reflected by the features of the Software. How to oversee this? Very simple: trust people who are nearby and tell You. :o)) What I want to say: All from the software developer on the one side to the user at the other and all between should get happy with our product! As shown in the past, UI/feature changes released without participation of the affected (users|supporters) don't fit that need. LibreOffice will grow best, if we achive it. And yes: we can! (tm) :o)) Stopping now spreading enthusiastic wordloads. :o)) -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice