Am Mittwoch, den 07.09.2016, 07:38 -0600 schrieb Joel Kulesza: > That's a fair opinion. Do you know whether there are plans to bring > any remaining dialogs >800x600 into compliance with this soft limit? > If so, do you know what approaches are planned? Consistency will > help adoption of design elements like the tabs in the citation > dialog.
Yes, the idea is to keep all dialogs under that limit. Are you aware of dialogs that are larger? > > > As to scrollbars, I don't think this is a good idea. This is not > > usable > > without the mouse (and I doubt it can be elegantly done with Qt). > > Scrollbars are traditionally mouse driven; however, for someone who > prefers the keyboard the arrow keys or page up / page down can be > used (thus only limiting Vim zealots like myself without yet more > exotic key bindings). Tab can be used to navigate between fields. > Again admitting ignorance, but it seems like the QScrollArea could be > used. Going further, perhaps the scrollbars can wrapped in a > conditional that queries the user's resolution on launch to see if > they are even needed (if the screen resolution is larger than the > dialog, don't draw them but embed the layouts that would traditional > lay within them directly into the dialog). I have never seen a dialog with a scroll area (as opposed to some scrollable browser or list widget). This sounds like awful GUI design. > > When I did the redesign, I really tried several options. It was > > _not_ > > possible to design a dialog of the proper size without using a > > pane/tabbar or toolbox. I selected the latter, since it is the most > > space-saving option and it does not introduce any extra-clicks. > > Sounds good, I appreciate your diligence and willingness to share > your approach. I'm just hoping to offer user perspectives and > options that might feel "more natural" for the uninitiated yet still > be serviceable and unintrusive to all. I really appreciate the feedback. > > Of course any redesign is annoying since you have to get used to > > the > > new UI, but we have to make the dialogs work for everybody. > > Understood. I'm still curious what fraction of LyX users have such > resolution limitations. Some interesting desktop web browser > statistics > here: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp. Actually, I prefer qualitative arguments over quantitative. If we would rely on number of users, many features (and language supports) would never have been implemented. > > > Any points I missed? > > What are your thoughts on relabeling to Find Citation and introducing > an F-based keyboard solution? This is a redesign (which as you note > is annoying); however, using "F" for "Find" is a more common design > element than "S" for "Search" vice "Save". That's fine with me. > > (Note that I am not talking about the shortcut to open the > search dialog) > > Because it does not work for me (or I don't know how to properly use > it), what is Alt-S supposed to do? If the dialog is opened, it will open the "Search Citation" section and put the cursor into the search field, so you can immediately go ahead and enter your search term (same as in LyX 2.1) > In closing, for your consideration and not requiring a response, > > Thank you for the continued discussion on this. Please don't get me > wrong: I truly value the work that you and the other developers do (I > hope to join you and contribute in some small ways once my studies > have finished). > > However, I've stood by silently until now but am compelled by Maria's > initiation of the discussion. I have introduced LyX to numerous > (cross-platform and savvy) new users and this is one of the > functional elements that commonly, once explained, gets the response > "but why?" I suppose the main line of thought that I've heard is > "why does Formatting look like a header with fields below it and > there are no fields for text entry below the Search Citation header" > not realizing it is in fact a clickable design element. Once > explained and the fields shown, the question is "why is that hidden > by default?" because, in my experience, most users are not writing > documents on a small resolution display and thus don't likely expect > such space-saving measures. As written above, we really appreciate any feedback. I am just arguing. > I do not want to diminish your efforts or discard your work, but this > strikes me as a potential case where the needs/expectations of the > many users may outweigh the needs of a the few (who can still be > accommodated). It is also somewhat a slippery slope. Netbooks drove > the change. What happens if LyX is ported to a device with a more > limited screen in terms of size / resolution? 800x600 was always the measure AFAIR. It somehow got forgotten when most developers used those larger screens. > To aid the current design, perhaps it is more sensible to have both > Search and Formatting initially collapsed to (a) instigate > inquisitive behavior that will lead to a click, (b) will then provide > the user a session-wide persistent open version of his/her preferred > portion, and (c) I believe by your logic, introduce no additional > clicks. Perhaps easier: include in the label "(click to open)" when > collapsed. This is not possible. One pane at a time must (and can) be opened. It is also not possible to have both open, which would be even a better option. Jürgen
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
