Le 2010-10-15 16:29, Mirek M. a écrit :
Hi Michel,
That gives me a lot to respond to -- I'll try to be as concise as possible.
a) Why the change in menu categorization? Because the old one wasn't good
enough. "File" contained tools that applied to both the currently-opened
file and to the office suite as a whole. "Edit" and "Tools" menus held
miscellaneous commands. There were commands under "Table" that weren't
specific to tables. It was a mess. But if anyone wants to revert back to the
classic UI, there definitely should be an option to do so.
b) I agree -- the Ribbon UI is less than ideal.
c) The interface definitely should be as flexible as possible.
d) Please read http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/the-citrus-menu/ :
I think it might answer some of your concerns.
I just read your second post on the subject. It seems more promising
than the first post. I am not a fan of black menus, which I find them
gorgeous, but harder to read. Maybe that's a problem with my
half-a-century old eyes.
Still, while the traditional menu system isn't perfect, I don't consider
it a disaster. Whether the traditional menu approach or a newer one is
used, we should make sure that we *improve* on the structure of menus
and on the user experience, whether it's for occasional users or power
users.
Right now, when I do word processing, compatibility issues often force
me to use Microsoft Office. But when I have the choice, I tend to prefer
Microsoft Office 2003 for short documents (it's easier to define pages,
styles, move illustrations...), but OpenOffice for anything above 20
pages (user-defined variables are easier to define and styles are easier
to define).
Regards,
--
Michel Gagnon
Montréal (Québec, Canada)
--
E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how to
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
