On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 01:03:38AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1) The number of items is very big. Do we have any room to grow ? Oowriter > interface is a clone of the old Word interface that was considered a > > 3) There is IMHO useless complexity, like the 7 different preview formats. > If we just drop everything except pdf with a simple parser that would run > aficionados)
> 4) Mathematics is a big elephant with a gigantic bottom crushing everybody. > I don't have Mathematica, neither Maple, I don't write formulas in Fraktur. > 5) There is some dead wood. Does Fax works anymore across platforms ? > > 6) The version control items are for geek. It should be done through macros > and then every geek can choose its favorite version control system. All of these are true of any potential re-org. You want to remove some menu items into optional LyX modules: great (old) idea, but doesn't need a menu re-org. Please do this, it would be very cool. > > - why a new structure would help > > The Web is full of articles investigating how people navigate in a tree. It > shows that if the tree is balanced with not too many levels and items are > structured in a logical way, people find the good item quicker. I'll be very impressed if you can find a balanced menu layout that makes sense logically, and is significantly better than the existing one :) > > - the guiding principles behind the design of the new structure > > 1) Recreate a balanced tree by exploding the Insert menu > 2) The Edit menu had become something very strange > 3) Isolation of a Math menu starts the path towards Activity menus. I'd be interested to see what you're suggesting, though I believe it should be incremental during the development period (done by release, of course). Could you further explain point 2) ? Somewhere in the archives I have a detailed explanation of why the Edit menu is the way it is. regards, john
