https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149230
Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected], | |[email protected] --- Comment #2 from Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> --- I didn't want to sidetrack the discussion on bug 135501, so I did not answer ajlittoz there, but I do have a few points to make about it... * The "usefulness of an application" and the quality of its UI are not distinct things. The User Interface is how you _use_ the application. If it is _useful_, then its amenable to _use_. So a good UI _is_ part of the objective of LO. By analogy, a good handle grip is part of what makes a hammer useful - even if, eventually, a hammer is about forceful blows, not about gripping. So, when producing a hammer, it is definitely part of the objective to give it a good handle grip. > Style usage should be encouraged by all means No. It should be encouraged by some means - but not to the extent of making it difficult to create a simple document with direct formatting, or to make direct-formatting changes to an existing document. > M$ Office-like UIs are wrong Do you mean ribbons? > they lead to the "intuitive application control" syndrome Never heard of that, but - I think I disagree. Ribbons make it clear that you do _not_ control the application and, instead, are spoon-fed a subset of its features. > they encourage direct formatting because the alternative style control is not > that obvious The main ribbon in MS Office has styles at the center of it, plus you have the Style bar. There's room for improvement, but styles are quite visible. > being immediately accessible How are ribbons more "immediately accessible" than menus? Or do you mean the single, main ribbon > In my point of view, LO doesn't offer yet a full original style-oriented UI. This is the interesting part. I'd love to see some ideas for that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
