Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
2010/11/1 Johannes Bausch johannes.bau...@gmail.com: Hey, Here's what I think the whole style and document setup should look like. It's done very quickly in Inkscape, so don't expect anything spectacular. Still, I hope you get the general idea. http://bausch-lai.de/img_ex/LibO/draft-styler.png Why page setup is outside stiles? One of the killer features on Writer is page styles (Word do not have them). - Styling is relative and inherits from parent (changes to the inherited things should be marked somehow, e.g. by a small icon) I think there should be an option for that on every drop down menu. For example, on character styles for Font you could have, on top of the font list, two options: - From parent style - From paragraph style and the font size could have a check box for Proportional: right now it is not easy for new users to discover that you can simply delete a point size and type a percentage to get a proportionally sized font. - You can import them from other documents - They are categorized: Paragraphs, Tables, Images I rather think that it should be more clear on documentation that images are inserted on frames than to create a new category of styles for images. Now, I think that direct formatting should behave as follows: - If you mark a word and want it red, you simply change its color - The style manager creates a new style, inherited from the surrounding words' styles (maybe in a new section auto styles or something along these lines) or some kind of class that only affects this property, like color: red (much like css works). - You get a dropdown in your direct formatting toolbar showing recent styles Even if I like the concept, I can see one big problem: most users will end with lots of repeated, unneeded styles! Ricardo -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/31/2010 12:11 AM, Michel Gagnon wrote: or, to put it clearly, styles OF tables. FWIW, I fake that by creating a set of styles just for tables, and a master table. Whenever I need a table, I simply copy the master table. I have been reminded it already exists (thanks Marc). Better documentation about styles, their attributes, their quircks, and their characteristics is needed. No question about it. But I also remember the last time I used character styles, they didn't always work the same way. Creating single attribute character styles is awkward. Very non-intuitive. If things are done out of sequence, the character style won't offer only one attribute. Maybe I'll write about that on my libreoffice blog later this week. jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/30/2010 08:55 PM, Robert Well, I guess I have now run afoul of the asked for a feature that was already there thing. The central issue here is that the obvious documentation doesn't cover all of the nooks and crannies. we probably should have a copy of a users manual that is part of the download package and something very obvious just after install that leads users to it. +1 It won't be read, but it is an excellent starting point. jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/29/2010 07:59 PM, Robert Derman wrote: I would like to see Writer add a Typewriter Mode that turns off ALL the automation of Styles and lets you do a totally manual formatted document. if that is all you want, why not just use vi, or emaacs? jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/29/2010 11:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote: On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: How repeatable tables are, depends upon the user. I, for one, wish that there were table styles. (I have a dozen or so documents with 500+ tables in them, all of which need to have the same presentation markup.) – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; if you are requesting what I think you are, then clearer documentation is what is required --- at least for styles used in writer. jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Michael, everyone, Here's an experimental mockup of how style editing could work: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/citrus-editing-styles/ http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/citrus-editing-styles/It changes a few things in an effort to be less daunting and more comprehensible to newbies. All the old features should still be there, though, just under different terminology. 2010/10/30 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net Le 2010-10-28 17:45, RGB ES a écrit : ... While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. ... If you only teach your students to use direct formatting, they will only use direct formatting afterwards: If you want to teach them how to properly use Writer, you need to teach them the correct use of styles since the beginning. I know, it is not easy, but it is more difficult to correct bad habits afterwards... BTW, tabs inside paragraph styles makes a lot more sense than tabs as formatting characters... After all, *tab stops as direct formatting must be avoided on properly formatted documents* ... I am puzzled as to why you want to avoid any direct formatting. I am a power user and a great fan of style sheets; yet, as far as I am concerned, the great strength of style sheets is when something needs to be repeatable. So I will define paragraph styles, bullet styles and heading styles because similar paragraph configurations will appear more than once in my document. Likewise for legends or equations in a technical document. On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: number and width of columns differ, some have text, others have numbers, etc. So a given style used in Table 1 won't be useful anywhere else in my document. So what do I do? I define a style for the table title and a font style for column headers and for the content. However, I typically will add tabs manually. Still it should be easier to understand how stylesheets work and how they are written. And some functions should be added. Amongst improvements I would like to see are: – better interactions between bullet styles and regular paragraph styles (or maybe a clearer explanation on how both work); – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; – links and dependencies between styles that work all the time (right now, it is guess work); – we should also be able to add a condition to an existing style, not just a new one; – the possibility of having a paragraph style followed by another one should also work within cells, so the style used for column header would be automatically followed by the one used for column content, for example; – last but not least, page styles should be optionally linked to a base style (i.e. margins of my first page could then be automatically modified from the margins of my standard page). For compatibility, the same stylesheets should exist in Impress, with added features linked to paragraph animation. Imagine the ease of transfer if a standard paragraph -- bullet 1 level 2 paragraph would contain all the following: – in Writer: font: Bodoni 10 pt; bullet: n-dash ; indents: 1p6, -1p6, 0; spaces: 5pt, 0.95 li, 0; – in Calc:... – in Impress: font Helvetica Bold 16pt blue ; bullet: n-dash gold ; indents: 3p, -3p, 0; spaces: 12pt, 1.1li, 0; visual effect: slide from left in 2 seconds... -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Carlos Martinez wrote: Robert Derman skrev 2010-10-29 21:59: Jussi Silvonen wrote: 2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. I may be odd in this but at times all the beautiful automation in Styles just seems to get in the way! I would like to see Writer add a Typewriter Mode that turns off ALL the automation of Styles and lets you do a totally manual formatted document. Is there anyone else that agrees with me on this? Hi, if you open the Help document (e.g. in Writer) and look after Manual or automatic formating you could fine how to write a ducument as if you are using a typerwriter My best regards Carlos Well, I guess I have now run afoul of the asked for a feature that was already there thing. I have seen this so often over the years that it tells me that we probably should have a copy of a users manual that is part of the download package and something very obvious just after install that leads users to it. OOo/LO is certainly not alone in this, most commercial/proprietary software today is equally remiss in this area, even MS Windows 7 itself is sorely lacking in the area of a users manual. After a lot of Googling I finally did manage to find and download one. Thing is it should have been on the MS Win 7 upgrade disk, and it should have been preloaded on this laptop when I bought it. Actually the fact that even the mighty Microsoft sucks in this area should give us an incentive to do better than them, or is it they? Whatever, perhaps we could get one of the people who wrote good users manuals for OOo to contribute one to be placed in the download package. I seem to remember a very good one by a lady by the name of Solveg as an example of what I mean. -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-30 06:49, jonathon a écrit : On 10/29/2010 11:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote: On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: How repeatable tables are, depends upon the user. I, for one, wish that there were table styles. (I have a dozen or so documents with 500+ tables in them, all of which need to have the same presentation markup.) I see. Still, we currently have a problem in that styles for tables work relatively well providing we don't create a table. And with the kind of situation Jonathon describes, I think we not only need styles that work well within a table (i.e. header for table line 1 followed by table body for other lines), but we also need table styles or, to put it clearly, styles OF tables. So one would call, for example, table style 1 and obtain a table with 5 columns of 5, 6, 6, 6, 10 picas, user-defined borders and spacings, user-chosen styles in each cell, etc. I see the programming challenge but the wonderful possibilities. – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; if you are requesting what I think you are, then clearer documentation is what is required --- at least for styles used in writer. jonathon I have been reminded it already exists (thanks Marc). But I also remember the last time I used character styles, they didn't always work the same way. For example, sometimes I simply got + Bold, while at other times, it seems the entire character styling information was remembered (so it would also change font, character stretch, colour...). That was back on OOo version 3.1.x or 3.2 on Windows XP. -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-30 15:47, Mirek M. a écrit : Hi Michael, everyone, Here's an experimental mockup of how style editing could work: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/citrus-editing-styles/ It changes a few things in an effort to be less daunting and more comprehensible to newbies. All the old features should still be there, though, just under different terminology. It looks nice. The approach, however, is similar to one that might be used in Ms Office 2003. There are two possible problems with it: - It is harder to define many styles at once this way than in the traditional dialogue box. On the other hand, the visual approach you have is great for fine tuning or for adding one or two styles to an existing document. - There has to be a way to define, and more importantly to see the specifications that are linked vs those that are not, those that are defined in relative vs absolute terms. In your example, I should see that Heading 5 is defined using Heading 6 as base style and that it will be followed by Body Text. I should also see that the only elements modified from base style are typeface (+Bold) and line (-Underline). Groups vs linking a style to a style. I actually see it as two very different concepts. We already know how a style may be linked to another base style. But apart from that, I see groups such as: styles used for the main document, styles for annexes (typically smaller type) You also suggest that bundled styles should now be deletable. I think it is a great idea, at least for all non-essential styles. In other words, it might be easier for the casual user to see by default the following: Body text, Headings 1 to 4. Regards, -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
2010/10/29 Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com: Le 2010-10-28 17:45, RGB ES a écrit : The only reason to see tab stops and other formatting codes is if you need to *interact* with them: if you have a good set of paragraph styles the ability to see tab stops and other formatting codes is useless. So, all the concepts presented in this thread seems to be geared towards direct formatting. If that's the case, I'm against it. While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. Just my 2 ¢ Yes, but from an instructional point of view in the classroom, the treatment of tabs in this manner would be welcomed. It would clearly illustrate the use of tabs to the majority of students who find it confusing. Marc If you only teach your students to use direct formatting, they will only use direct formatting afterwards: If you want to teach them how to properly use Writer, you need to teach them the correct use of styles since the beginning. I know, it is not easy, but it is more difficult to correct bad habits afterwards... BTW, tabs inside paragraph styles makes a lot more sense than tabs as formatting characters: when you know your paragraph style have, say, two tab stops at this and that position, it is not a surprise if the cursor jump there when you hit the tab key... after all, *you* set that position. But tab stops as direct formatting are IMO more difficult to explain because the same key will behave differently depending on where the cursor is: maybe the confusion comes from there. After all, *tab stops as direct formatting must be avoided on properly formatted documents* so why to spend time showing that problematic use? Because of didactics? I admit I'd never teach sorftware to a classroom (even if I maintain several guides and a book about Writer on Spanish), but I have more than 15 year of experience teaching physics and mathematics to all levels, from kids to university students, and my experience is that explaining difficult concepts the easy way with flashing didactic resources is always a bad practice: going to the point is more difficult, to the teacher non less than to the students, but it always gives better results on the long run. -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
I agree with you - I write my documents with LaTeX and there you really don't have direct formatting tools. The problem is, though, that tabs are a direct formatting tool by definition - you mark a passage and set your tab stop, just like the character a. It's not a property of your whole document. Indeed, if you want the same tab stop in several parts of the document, you have to do tedious work: remember the tab stop position, mark the passages you need it and manually set it. This is why I don't like tabs. The suggested improvement would let you place snap points (just like in Inkscape, yes) on the ruler - for the whole document, or for the page type you're currently using. Then, when you write text, you can place tabs by pressing tab and they can be snapped to a ruler by resizing them with the mouse - like that you can choose to take the next, the last or whatever snap point you want (note that this would break compatibility with MS Office since there you can only tab to the next tab stop). Another advantage would be that if you move such a snap point line, all tabs all over your document will follow - you don't have to repeat that for every paragraph. 2010/10/29 Jussi Silvonen jussi.silvo...@gmail.com: 2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Well, that's not the way I use tab stops on Writer ;)
Suppose you want to have a description(1): a lone word to the left
followed by a paragraph aligned as a block:
Word: Definition
.More definition
.More definition
Another: Definition
.More definition
.More definition
Then you set your paragraph style with space before text and a
negative indent for the first line (on Space and Indent tab) plus a
tab stop at a distance from margin equal to the space before text
you set before (on Tabs tab): bingo! Type the word to be defined,
press tab and start to type your definition. In this case (the only I
use) tab stops are part of the paragraph design, not direct
formatting.
(1) on LaTeX this is something like
\begin{description}
\item [{Word}] Definition and More definition
\item [{Another}] Definition and More definition
\end{description}
2010/10/29 Johannes Bausch johannes.bau...@gmail.com:
I agree with you - I write my documents with LaTeX and there you
really don't have direct formatting tools. The problem is, though,
that tabs are a direct formatting tool by definition - you mark a
passage and set your tab stop, just like the character a. It's not a
property of your whole document. Indeed, if you want the same tab stop
in several parts of the document, you have to do tedious work:
remember the tab stop position, mark the passages you need it and
manually set it. This is why I don't like tabs.
The suggested improvement would let you place snap points (just like
in Inkscape, yes) on the ruler - for the whole document, or for the
page type you're currently using. Then, when you write text, you can
place tabs by pressing tab and they can be snapped to a ruler by
resizing them with the mouse - like that you can choose to take the
next, the last or whatever snap point you want (note that this would
break compatibility with MS Office since there you can only tab to
the next tab stop).
Another advantage would be that if you move such a snap point line,
all tabs all over your document will follow - you don't have to repeat
that for every paragraph.
2010/10/29 Jussi Silvonen jussi.silvo...@gmail.com:
2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com
Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex
documents (styles, styles and more styles!).
What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a
redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of
new users.
--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Jussi Silvonen wrote: 2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. I may be odd in this but at times all the beautiful automation in Styles just seems to get in the way! I would like to see Writer add a Typewriter Mode that turns off ALL the automation of Styles and lets you do a totally manual formatted document. Is there anyone else that agrees with me on this? -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Robert Derman skrev 2010-10-29 21:59: Jussi Silvonen wrote: 2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. I may be odd in this but at times all the beautiful automation in Styles just seems to get in the way! I would like to see Writer add a Typewriter Mode that turns off ALL the automation of Styles and lets you do a totally manual formatted document. Is there anyone else that agrees with me on this? Hi, if you open the Help document (e.g. in Writer) and look after Manual or automatic formating you could fine how to write a ducument as if you are using a typerwriter My best regards Carlos -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Fri Oct 29 2010 12:59:05 GMT-0700 (PDT) Robert Derman wrote: Jussi Silvonen wrote: 2010/10/29 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. I may be odd in this but at times all the beautiful automation in Styles just seems to get in the way! I would like to see Writer add a Typewriter Mode that turns off ALL the automation of Styles and lets you do a totally manual formatted document. Is there anyone else that agrees with me on this? +1 -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-28 17:45, RGB ES a écrit : ... While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. ... If you only teach your students to use direct formatting, they will only use direct formatting afterwards: If you want to teach them how to properly use Writer, you need to teach them the correct use of styles since the beginning. I know, it is not easy, but it is more difficult to correct bad habits afterwards... BTW, tabs inside paragraph styles makes a lot more sense than tabs as formatting characters... After all, *tab stops as direct formatting must be avoided on properly formatted documents* ... I am puzzled as to why you want to avoid any direct formatting. I am a power user and a great fan of style sheets; yet, as far as I am concerned, the great strength of style sheets is when something needs to be repeatable. So I will define paragraph styles, bullet styles and heading styles because similar paragraph configurations will appear more than once in my document. Likewise for legends or equations in a technical document. On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: number and width of columns differ, some have text, others have numbers, etc. So a given style used in Table 1 won't be useful anywhere else in my document. So what do I do? I define a style for the table title and a font style for column headers and for the content. However, I typically will add tabs manually. Still it should be easier to understand how stylesheets work and how they are written. And some functions should be added. Amongst improvements I would like to see are: – better interactions between bullet styles and regular paragraph styles (or maybe a clearer explanation on how both work); – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; – links and dependencies between styles that work all the time (right now, it is guess work); – we should also be able to add a condition to an existing style, not just a new one; – the possibility of having a paragraph style followed by another one should also work within cells, so the style used for column header would be automatically followed by the one used for column content, for example; – last but not least, page styles should be optionally linked to a base style (i.e. margins of my first page could then be automatically modified from the margins of my standard page). For compatibility, the same stylesheets should exist in Impress, with added features linked to paragraph animation. Imagine the ease of transfer if a standard paragraph -- bullet 1 level 2 paragraph would contain all the following: – in Writer: font: Bodoni 10 pt; bullet: n-dash ; indents: 1p6, -1p6, 0; spaces: 5pt, 0.95 li, 0; – in Calc:... – in Impress: font Helvetica Bold 16pt blue ; bullet: n-dash gold ; indents: 3p, -3p, 0; spaces: 12pt, 1.1li, 0; visual effect: slide from left in 2 seconds... -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-29 11:14, RGB ES a écrit : If you only teach your students to use direct formatting, they will only use direct formatting afterwards: If you want to teach them how to properly use Writer, you need to teach them the correct use of styles since the beginning. I know, it is not easy, but it is more difficult to correct bad habits afterwards... BTW, tabs inside paragraph styles makes a lot more sense than tabs as formatting characters: when you know your paragraph style have, say, two tab stops at this and that position, it is not a surprise if the cursor jump there when you hit the tab key... after all, *you* set that position. But tab stops as direct formatting are IMO more difficult to explain because the same key will behave differently depending on where the cursor is: maybe the confusion comes from there. After all, *tab stops as direct formatting must be avoided on properly formatted documents* so why to spend time showing that problematic use? Because of didactics? I admit I'd never teach sorftware to a classroom (even if I maintain several guides and a book about Writer on Spanish), but I have more than 15 year of experience teaching physics and mathematics to all levels, from kids to university students, and my experience is that explaining difficult concepts the easy way with flashing didactic resources is always a bad practice: going to the point is more difficult, to the teacher non less than to the students, but it always gives better results on the long run. I agree with teaching the students all about styling, however, in a typical Canadian classroom, at the primary level, there are 8 periods or instructional time per day and each instructional period last 40 minutes. With the academic load (programmes) that we teach, as well as taking into account class size (approximately 25-30 students per class), with in-class integration of special needs students as well as a ration of 11:1 students/computer this may prove a little daunting. It would perhaps, in this case, be more realistic to teach students concepts in direct formatting in the early academic years and when the students understanding and patience permits it at a later stage of their academic years, styling could be broached. It is more important to get the students to produce work than to spend time on styling when the students will not have enough understanding or patience to sit still for it. Let's not forget that the function could be turned off/on by the user whenever wished. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
2010/10/30 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net: I am puzzled as to why you want to avoid any direct formatting. I am a power user and a great fan of style sheets; yet, as far as I am concerned, the great strength of style sheets is when something needs to be repeatable. So I will define paragraph styles, bullet styles and heading styles because similar paragraph configurations will appear more than once in my document. Likewise for legends or equations in a technical document. On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: number and width of columns differ, some have text, others have numbers, etc. Number and width of columns are not controlled by styles. In fact you cannot control almost nothing from tables on any way within Writer, not even with autoformatted tables. Styles only apply to cell content, and to that I always try to avoid any direct formatting. – better interactions between bullet styles and regular paragraph styles (or maybe a clearer explanation on how both work); Agree – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; Actually, that's the way character styles work right now: if you link your character style with Predefined and only change a few attributes, all other attributes will be inherited from the paragraph style. – the possibility of having a paragraph style followed by another one should also work within cells, so the style used for column header would be automatically followed by the one used for column content, for example; If you activate table headers (you need to insert the table from Insert - Table instead of using the toolbar button) Table header paragraph style is automatically applied to the header cells and Table content to all others. The system needs to be a lot more flexible, though. – last but not least, page styles should be optionally linked to a base style (i.e. margins of my first page could then be automatically modified from the margins of my standard page). 100 % agreement!!! For compatibility, the same stylesheets should exist in Impress, with added features linked to paragraph animation. Imagine the ease of transfer if a standard paragraph -- bullet 1 level 2 paragraph would contain all the following: – in Writer: font: Bodoni 10 pt; bullet: n-dash ; indents: 1p6, -1p6, 0; spaces: 5pt, 0.95 li, 0; – in Calc:... – in Impress: font Helvetica Bold 16pt blue ; bullet: n-dash gold ; indents: 3p, -3p, 0; spaces: 12pt, 1.1li, 0; visual effect: slide from left in 2 seconds... Yes, paragraph and character styles on Draw and Impress will be great! Let me add one thing: styles for Math I desperately need that (Ok, I'm exaggerating... ;) ) -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-29 20:12, RGB ES a écrit : 2010/10/30 Michel Gagnonmic...@mgagnon.net: I am puzzled as to why you want to avoid any direct formatting. I am a power user and a great fan of style sheets; yet, as far as I am concerned, the great strength of style sheets is when something needs to be repeatable. So I will define paragraph styles, bullet styles and heading styles because similar paragraph configurations will appear more than once in my document. Likewise for legends or equations in a technical document. On the other hand, tables rarely repeat themselves: number and width of columns differ, some have text, others have numbers, etc. Number and width of columns are not controlled by styles. In fact you cannot control almost nothing from tables on any way within Writer, not even with autoformatted tables. Styles only apply to cell content, and to that I always try to avoid any direct formatting. – better interactions between bullet styles and regular paragraph styles (or maybe a clearer explanation on how both work); Agree – partial character styles (and maybe partial paragraph styles): for example, Strong (or accented) might simply defined as whatever paragraph style and font styles are already applied + Bold, and note might be defined as 85% of height in grey; Actually, that's the way character styles work right now: if you link your character style with Predefined and only change a few attributes, all other attributes will be inherited from the paragraph style. – the possibility of having a paragraph style followed by another one should also work within cells, so the style used for column header would be automatically followed by the one used for column content, for example; If you activate table headers (you need to insert the table from Insert - Table instead of using the toolbar button) Table header paragraph style is automatically applied to the header cells and Table content to all others. The system needs to be a lot more flexible, though. – last but not least, page styles should be optionally linked to a base style (i.e. margins of my first page could then be automatically modified from the margins of my standard page). 100 % agreement!!! For compatibility, the same stylesheets should exist in Impress, with added features linked to paragraph animation. Imagine the ease of transfer if a standard paragraph -- bullet 1 level 2 paragraph would contain all the following: – in Writer: font: Bodoni 10 pt; bullet: n-dash ; indents: 1p6, -1p6, 0; spaces: 5pt, 0.95 li, 0; – in Calc:... – in Impress: font Helvetica Bold 16pt blue ; bullet: n-dash gold ; indents: 3p, -3p, 0; spaces: 12pt, 1.1li, 0; visual effect: slide from left in 2 seconds... Yes, paragraph and character styles on Draw and Impress will be great! Let me add one thing: styles for Math I desperately need that (Ok, I'm exaggerating... ;) ) It may be a good idea to repost this under a descriptive subject line so that other power-users may chime in? This may be of interest to the LibO dev who may be interested in improving the treatment of styles. This way, these suggestions and comments would not be lost inside a thread such as this. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Michel, 2010/10/28 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ Maybe I am too traditionalist, but I really don't like the idea. Typically, if I want to control tabs, I also want to see the ruler, hence seeing the little arrows in the ruler is fine with me. On the other hand, when I remove the ruler, it usually is because I want to see the final result -- or close to it. In such situations, I really don't want to see tab codes, unbreakable spaces, paragraph marks and other non-printable characters in my text. Just to be clear, these tab codes only appear when the text cursor is next to the space, like this: http://clickortap.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/citrus-tabs-cursor.png . It doesn't really mess up the document space with non-printable characters. But these tab things could definitely be turned off. That's the perk of open-source: everything can be customizable. :) -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Marc, 2010/10/28 Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com Le 2010-10-27 20:23, Michel Gagnon a écrit : Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ Maybe I am too traditionalist, but I really don't like the idea. Typically, if I want to control tabs, I also want to see the ruler, hence seeing the little arrows in the ruler is fine with me. On the other hand, when I remove the ruler, it usually is because I want to see the final result -- or close to it. In such situations, I really don't want to see tab codes, unbreakable spaces, paragraph marks and other non-printable characters in my text. Bonjour Michel: I don't mind it. Actually it reminds me of some of the music software in appearance and give the impression of a musical pause. Maybe this is why I like the look. BTW ... Mirek, are you a musician who works with music software? Just curious. :) Not really. I have worked a little with music software, yes, but I wouldn't call myself a musician. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Johannes, 2010/10/28 Johannes Bausch johannes.bau...@gmail.com I really like the idea. Many new people (children) who start working with an office suite don't know what tabs are (well, at least that's what I encountered). Seeing them as dynamic whitespace like this would be a great help. Maybe this could be enhanced even further: why not making it rescalable with the mouse, and, while you do it, a line indicator showing your current position on the ruler shows up? When you release your mouse key, the ruler hides again. +1 This could then be enhanced even further by making snap points in the ruler. In a similar way it's done in Draw and Inksacpe? An office suite should work intuitively. We're working more and more with the mouse; tabs have never been the best idea for people who work not so frequently with word or writer. Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-28 05:29, Mirek M. a écrit : Hi Michel, 2010/10/28 Michel Gagnonmic...@mgagnon.net Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ Maybe I am too traditionalist, but I really don't like the idea. Typically, if I want to control tabs, I also want to see the ruler, hence, seeing the little arrows in the ruler is fine with me. On the other hand, when I remove the ruler, it usually is because I want to see the final result -- or close to it. In such situations, I really don't want to see tab codes, unbreakable spaces, paragraph marks and other non-printable characters in my text. Just to be clear, these tab codes only appear when the text cursor is next to the space, like this: http://clickortap.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/citrus-tabs-cursor.png . It doesn't really mess up the document space with non-printable characters. But these tab things could definitely be turned off. That's the perk of open-source: everything can be customizable. :) Ok. I see clearly. BTW, I hope I don't sound too critical. Overall, I find your reflections and suggestions on the improved interface really interesting. Regards. -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-28 12:38, Johannes Bausch a écrit : I really like the idea. Many new people (children) who start working with an office suite don't know what tabs are (well, at least that's what I encountered). Seeing them as dynamic whitespace like this would be a great help. Maybe this could be enhanced even further: why not making it rescalable with the mouse, and, while you do it, a line indicator showing your current position on the ruler shows up? When you release your mouse key, the ruler hides again. This could then be enhanced even further by making snap points in the ruler. An office suite should work intuitively. We're working more and more with the mouse; tabs have never been the best idea for people who work not so frequently with word or writer. I agree with this. I still find it amazing that my grade 8 students are still unaware of the use of tabs in wordprocessing. They are aware of the Alt-tab cycling of windows but not in document writing. The same can be said for creating tables. I also agree with Johannes, that if the students had this option, or even better, if teachers had this option for the younger student, it would be a great tool to use to explore the world of tabs. Kids are very visual and react quite favourably with visual objects. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
The only reason to see tab stops and other formatting codes is if you need to *interact* with them: if you have a good set of paragraph styles the ability to see tab stops and other formatting codes is useless. So, all the concepts presented in this thread seems to be geared towards direct formatting. If that's the case, I'm against it. While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. Just my 2 ¢ -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Thu Oct 28 2010 14:45:36 GMT-0700 (PDT) RGB ES wrote: The only reason to see tab stops and other formatting codes is if you need to *interact* with them: if you have a good set of paragraph styles the ability to see tab stops and other formatting codes is useless. So, all the concepts presented in this thread seems to be geared towards direct formatting. If that's the case, I'm against it. While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. Just my 2 ¢ +1 -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-28 17:45, RGB ES a écrit : The only reason to see tab stops and other formatting codes is if you need to *interact* with them: if you have a good set of paragraph styles the ability to see tab stops and other formatting codes is useless. So, all the concepts presented in this thread seems to be geared towards direct formatting. If that's the case, I'm against it. While direct formatting *seems* to be good on two page school reports, it is a nightmare when you need to create complex and well structured documents. Writer have a good tradition of tools that helps the build of complex documents (styles, styles and more styles!). What I would like to see instead of more direct formatting tools, is a redesign of the way styles are defined to easy the learning curve of new users. Relying on styles is Writer's trademark. I think we need to give even more power to this trademark instead of going the route of MSWord. Just my 2 ¢ Yes, but from an instructional point of view in the classroom, the treatment of tabs in this manner would be welcomed. It would clearly illustrate the use of tabs to the majority of students who find it confusing. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ Maybe I am too traditionalist, but I really don't like the idea. Typically, if I want to control tabs, I also want to see the ruler, hence seeing the little arrows in the ruler is fine with me. On the other hand, when I remove the ruler, it usually is because I want to see the final result -- or close to it. In such situations, I really don't want to see tab codes, unbreakable spaces, paragraph marks and other non-printable characters in my text. -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-27 20:23, Michel Gagnon a écrit : Le 2010-10-27 12:11, Mirek M. a écrit : Hey everyone, New post about managing tabs without rulers: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/citrus-tabs/ Maybe I am too traditionalist, but I really don't like the idea. Typically, if I want to control tabs, I also want to see the ruler, hence seeing the little arrows in the ruler is fine with me. On the other hand, when I remove the ruler, it usually is because I want to see the final result -- or close to it. In such situations, I really don't want to see tab codes, unbreakable spaces, paragraph marks and other non-printable characters in my text. Bonjour Michel: I don't mind it. Actually it reminds me of some of the music software in appearance and give the impression of a musical pause. Maybe this is why I like the look. BTW ... Mirek, are you a musician who works with music software? Just curious. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 17:07, Ian ian.ly...@theingots.org wrote: and it is important. The user interface and overall design of Inkscape is IMHO better than Draw but since it is more recent in origin that is not really surprising. It would also mean that we would be tapping into the Inkscape community as well as supporting it which seems to me a more efficient deployment of scarce resources. Sure, it could eliminate working on 2 code bases that are catering to broadly comparable needs. But would the Inkscape devs be agreeable to the necessary adjustments in their roadmap and target vision? I feel pessimistic that a consensus could be reached... David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 01:58 +0300, Povilas Kanapickas wrote: First of all, Office suite should include a tool to make at least moderate quality schemes and similar things. That tool should be also integrated within the suite, so it'd be possible to edit embedded graphics directly. Yes but ideally also able to stand alone from the suite for use in other circumstances. Integration through internal messaging between applications is perfectly possible. In Inkscape, raster graphics can be embedded and various effects applied through the extensions. I can't see it being impossible to add editing as another extension but maybe a better approach is to communicate with other editors already in existence. Embedding pngs seems to produce svg flies about 30% bigger than the originals from a quick and unscientific check. Double click a graphic and automatically open it in a raster editor would be another possibility with save returning the edited image back to Inkscape. That would require some open standard protocols to be defined for transfer of data between apps (if it doesn't already exist). Drag and drop between different apps supporting the standard would be another possibility. It's really only a way of short-cutting cut and paste. The more powerful the integrated graphic editor is, the less there will be users who need to do the 'long trip' just to edit a graphic object (by saying long trip I mean deleting the object, finding the image in the file manager, opening it, editing, embedding into right location and adjusting image parameters). This is the reason, why the solution 'Let's just have Draw, and leave Inkscape for the advanced users' isn't viable. In addition to that, why to decentralize the (scarce??) resources available? Of course, I wouldn't be saying all that if there were usability problems with Inkscape. But IMHO it has quite low learning curve while providing a lot of features. Agreed. What we need is innovation to get away from the megalithic approach and build cross platform standards that support data messaging between applications. Then smaller applications that are easier to develop and manage are possible, working together or apart as required. With phone technologies moving into the computer space this becomes more important to help with power consumption, cost etc. Just my 2 cents Povilas -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 06:03, Mirek M. maz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I put up another post: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/citrus-page-selection/ . It's quite short this time. This looks a good solution to me. +1 for adoption. David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 20:16 +0200, Mirek M. wrote: Very nice indeed. However, I still haven't found a way to do anything significant with it whereas I have no such problems with Draw or Visio. But it brings the other question: Inkscape is also another vector-based program that works with an open format. So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I'd like LibO to keep Draw. As I see it, Draw and Inkscape are suited for different purposes. Draw is mainly for page layout/design (like MS Publisher) and maybe a little for diagramming (like MS Visio). Inkscape, on the other hand, has always been more oriented towards graphic designers Still, it'd be great if LibO had perfect SVG support. :) Personally I use Inkscape for page layout too. The facilities for aligning text are excellent. What would be better would be to port some of the Draw features to Inkscape to enhance it. eg ability to export to a wider range of file formats and of course develop presentation pages for Impress. SVG is something Draw has never got properly to grips with and it is important. The user interface and overall design of Inkscape is IMHO better than Draw but since it is more recent in origin that is not really surprising. It would also mean that we would be tapping into the Inkscape community as well as supporting it which seems to me a more efficient deployment of scarce resources. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi all, On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis goda...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/10/19 Gianluca Turconi m...@letturefantastiche.com In data 19 ottobre 2010 alle ore 14:35:45, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis el...@users.sourceforge.net ha scritto: If wee want a really customizable UI the best way is to go to something like Mocilla XULL adapted to LibO I know people who would kill because of XUL slowness in Moz UI. :) -- Gianluca Turconi -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org discuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%252bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 The slowness is not from XUL as user interface is that all the application is written in XUL+JavaScript. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 Isn't it better to use a native toolkit and to load the theme on runtime? Of course, some customization capabilities would be lost, but we won't be adding rather large dependence of XULRunner (which is, at least on my system, as large as entire widget toolkit). Povilas -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. For the purpose of a draw replacement/integration point I would have a look at dia: http://projects.gnome.org/dia/ reagards, Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi everyone, I posted another short blog post: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/the-citrus-search-box/ http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/the-citrus-search-box/Feedback appreciated. -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:05 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. Inkscape is no more difficult to learn than Draw. Primary school children can use it so I don't see why we would not use it because it is too professional. In the closed source world it might have therefore been more expensive but to us it is simply a matter of choosing the best set of tools. For the purpose of a draw replacement/integration point I would have a look at dia: http://projects.gnome.org/dia/ Only if the general consensus is that dia is better than Inkscape and Draw. Seems to me a better strategy for the Open Source world to focus efforts on the best vector engine that supports svg and add facilities to that to meet differing needs. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
To be honest, I am neither using inkscape, dia or draw on a regular basis. But I think the point is that inkscape is a full-blown vector graphic program, it aims to compete against corel draw or adobe products. which is great. Dia tries to do the same for business graphics and aims to be a competitor for MS visio. which is great, too. As part of a office suite, I think a program like dia should be there. but maybe draw is even better than dia already? I see Inkscape more as an additional piece of software for vector graphics (comparing to gimp for pixelgraphics), but I might be wrong. regards, Bernhard - Ursprüngliche Mail - On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:05 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. Inkscape is no more difficult to learn than Draw. Primary school children can use it so I don't see why we would not use it because it is too professional. In the closed source world it might have therefore been more expensive but to us it is simply a matter of choosing the best set of tools. For the purpose of a draw replacement/integration point I would have a look at dia: http://projects.gnome.org/dia/ Only if the general consensus is that dia is better than Inkscape and Draw. Seems to me a better strategy for the Open Source world to focus efforts on the best vector engine that supports svg and add facilities to that to meet differing needs. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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 -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Benjamin Horst wrote (22-10-10 17:52) Sorry that I haven't been involved in this discussion to this point, but Draw has the major advantage of a native interface on Mac OS X, which Dia and Inkscape do not (I think both require X11, though I haven't checked lately). I do not want to ignore advantages of Inkscape and Dia, but a simple advantage of Draw is that it is well integrated with the rest of our software. So as far as I can do what I want, I am more then happy with it ;-) Best, Cor -- - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - - ideas/remarks for the community council? See http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-22 11:44, Ian a écrit : On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:05 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. Inkscape is no more difficult to learn than Draw. Primary school children can use it so I don't see why we would not use it because it is too professional. In the closed source world it might have therefore been more expensive but to us it is simply a matter of choosing the best set of tools. Hi Ian: Have you tested this on students/kids? I would be interested to hear of the results if you had done this. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 17:48 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: To be honest, I am neither using inkscape, dia or draw on a regular basis. But I think the point is that inkscape is a full-blown vector graphic program, it aims to compete against corel draw or adobe products. which is great. So why limit it just because its part of LO? I don't see any logic in this except from a marketing perspective and that is usually related to pricing licenses. You only need this cut down version so we can charge a premium for the full version That is part of closed source marketing. We don't have any need to make such constraints. The only argument would be if Inkscape was more difficult to use or is a problem on the Mac as Ben points out. Certainly I have used both Draw and Inkscape pretty extensively and I'd say they are similar in difficulty to do simple things. Dia tries to do the same for business graphics and aims to be a competitor for MS visio. which is great, too. Why try and compete with closed source products by adopting the same constraints that their marketing people impose only for reasons of selling licenses at different prices? As part of a office suite, I think a program like dia should be there. but maybe draw is even better than dia already? Last time I looked it was but that was a while ago. Inkscape is better than both so why compromise? (I don't use Macs so from a selfish point of view I'd say that the Windows and Linux and eventually Android will be much bigger markets ;-) ) I see Inkscape more as an additional piece of software for vector graphics (comparing to gimp for pixelgraphics), but I might be wrong. Yes, but GIMP is IMHO a lot more difficult to learn than Inkscape or Draw. Vectors are the appropriate tool for designing graphics, pixel editors should be used for digital images sourced from cameras and scanners, not originating diagrams and illustrations. The lack of support in Windows over the years for a vector standard has been and still is to an extent holding back technology. That is why we should be pushing for svg and teaching people to use the right tools for graphic illustration. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-22 13:03, Cor Nouws a écrit : Benjamin Horst wrote (22-10-10 17:52) Sorry that I haven't been involved in this discussion to this point, but Draw has the major advantage of a native interface on Mac OS X, which Dia and Inkscape do not (I think both require X11, though I haven't checked lately). I do not want to ignore advantages of Inkscape and Dia, but a simple advantage of Draw is that it is well integrated with the rest of our software. So as far as I can do what I want, I am more then happy with it ;-) Best, Cor I installed Inkscape on my distro and gave myself a refresher look and compared it the Draw. From a teachers perspective at the elementary level, I would say that the Draw would win out just for the mere fact that in the realm of the LibO suite, the look and feel just fit. I think that most students/kids would gravitate to Draw. I am not too sure about the advantages to bitmap and vector formats anymore as the advantages seem to have blurred over the years. Are there still any clear advantages? BTW ... I usually use the Gimp myself and have my students install it at home as well. The do manage to use it quite well. This however, with a helping hand from myself to soften up the learning curve. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Povilas Kanapickas, 22-10-2010 06:55: Hi all, On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis goda...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/10/19 Gianluca Turconim...@letturefantastiche.com In data 19 ottobre 2010 alle ore 14:35:45, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis el...@users.sourceforge.net ha scritto: If wee want a really customizable UI the best way is to go to something like Mocilla XULL adapted to LibO I know people who would kill because of XUL slowness in Moz UI. :) The slowness is not from XUL as user interface is that all the application is written in XUL+JavaScript. Isn't it better to use a native toolkit and to load the theme on runtime? Of course, some customization capabilities would be lost, but we won't be adding rather large dependence of XULRunner (which is, at least on my system, as large as entire widget toolkit). Regarding XUL slowness, be aware that on the client side, XUL itself is just an XML used to describe the interface. You can access the interface using C, C++ or another language that its interface definition language supports. That means we could make most of the intensive tasks on C++. But there are other issues with XUL performance, as CSS rules. The rules have to be much optimized to avoid losing performance. Anyway, using XPCOM and XUL at the same task can kill minds. VCL could be redesigned. I don't know its internals to say whether would be easier to redesign or start using native toolkits. XUL uses native toolkits to render, FWIW. But the QT port is not stable. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:35 -0400, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-22 11:44, Ian a écrit : On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:05 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. Inkscape is no more difficult to learn than Draw. Primary school children can use it so I don't see why we would not use it because it is too professional. In the closed source world it might have therefore been more expensive but to us it is simply a matter of choosing the best set of tools. Hi Ian: Have you tested this on students/kids? I would be interested to hear of the results if you had done this. Informally the feedback I get is that it's easy enough to teach young children how to make basic shapes and label diagrams etc in either Draw or Inkscape. Unfortunately many schools have already bought Fireworks, Corel, Xara, Serif Draw etc so it will take time to get them to migrate. A big problem is teacher thinking that Paint is a drawing program! That is more of a problem than any skills limitations in the children. We really should have higher expectations of children. They then live up to them rather than down to some low level limits artificially imposed by adults. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-22 14:09, Ian a écrit : On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:35 -0400, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-22 11:44, Ian a écrit : On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:05 +0200, Krabina Bernhard wrote: So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I don't think so, as Inkscape ist something for professional users. Inkscape is no more difficult to learn than Draw. Primary school children can use it so I don't see why we would not use it because it is too professional. In the closed source world it might have therefore been more expensive but to us it is simply a matter of choosing the best set of tools. Hi Ian: Have you tested this on students/kids? I would be interested to hear of the results if you had done this. Informally the feedback I get is that it's easy enough to teach young children how to make basic shapes and label diagrams etc in either Draw or Inkscape. Unfortunately many schools have already bought Fireworks, Corel, Xara, Serif Draw etc so it will take time to get them to migrate. A big problem is teacher thinking that Paint is a drawing program! That is more of a problem than any skills limitations in the children. We really should have higher expectations of children. They then live up to them rather than down to some low level limits artificially imposed by adults. Thanks. In my 18 years of experience at elementary level and being the Teacher-Admin designate at school level for the same amount of time (my volunteer position duties was to network with teachers and help them use the right tools for the right jobs), 90% or even more of paint/draw work was to print easy shapes for geometric work or to touch up photos. Touching up photos has easily overpassed the geometric work on school computers. We try to encourage kids to use vector programmes but their needs are clearly those of photo-retouch and .jpg work. I am not sure if this makes a difference as to which tool should be included in the suite. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Ian: Have you tested this on students/kids? I would be interested to hear of the results if you had done this. Informally the feedback I get is that it's easy enough to teach young children how to make basic shapes and label diagrams etc in either Draw or Inkscape. Unfortunately many schools have already bought Fireworks, Corel, Xara, Serif Draw etc so it will take time to get them to migrate. A big problem is teacher thinking that Paint is a drawing program! That is more of a problem than any skills limitations in the children. We really should have higher expectations of children. They then live up to them rather than down to some low level limits artificially imposed by adults. Thanks. In my 18 years of experience at elementary level and being the Teacher-Admin designate at school level for the same amount of time (my volunteer position duties was to network with teachers and help them use the right tools for the right jobs), 90% or even more of paint/draw work was to print easy shapes for geometric work or to touch up photos. Touching up photos has easily overpassed the geometric work on school computers. We try to encourage kids to use vector programmes but their needs are clearly those of photo-retouch and .jpg work. All this begs the question of what learning we are trying to achieve. I have two key goals in ICT 1. Prepare them for change because that is one thing that is certain. 2. Develop the skills and good habits needed early so they don't have to unlearn stuff. For 1. they have to use a range of applications. One of the biggest problems with MSO in schools is that it becomes the only thing taught. Children are not educated, they are trained in using an office suite - that would also be true of OOo/LO if it was used in the same way. Touching up photos IMHO might have surpassed design work but is that really educationally desirable? Look at how often we need to communicate graphically. Draw diagrams in science, simple plans such as layout of a room or garden. I'd say the reason we teach bit map editing is because it is superficially easy, Windows only comes with such tools and teachers generally don't have the design skills themselves. Neither of these reasons is particularly sound educationally. I am not sure if this makes a difference as to which tool should be included in the suite. Back in the 80s when Acorn computers were in most UK schools, a good vector drawing program and its engine were built into the OS. This encouraged 3rd party developers to eg provide vector export to spreadsheet tables, graphics etc. You could export a graphic generated from any third party spreadsheet in a vector format, embed it in a text document, rotate it and scale it without loss of resolution. You could take such a graphic into a drawing program ungroup its components and edit it. All of this is possible if you have a standard vector format that is open and documented. This was back in 1988/9 over 20 years ago so this is one example of how Windows and commercial licensing has held back progress. We are so used to it now we just assume that is the way it has to be. If LibO had a standard and openly published svg engine (and Inkscape already has it) just think of the possibilities. You can already access many vector routines in Inkscape from scripted commands so a longer term goal would be to make a LibO UI that fit the svg engine and documented it so third parties could write applets that could access the routines for specific tasks. eg rendering charts and graphs as svg files to export from Calc. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications A new approach to assessment for learning www.theINGOTs.org - 01827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 16:50, David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz wrote: If you're a power user, one might prefer to have a purely icon/tooltip-based interface? Actually, one program UI that I personally find nicely laid out is Inkscape... Obviously, this would be more of a power user's layout, and you could only really offer it if LibO had themes/skins, because it probably wouldn't be to everyone's taste... David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 21:58, Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net wrote: Very nice indeed. However, I still haven't found a way to do anything significant with it whereas I have no such problems with Draw or Visio. But it brings the other question: Inkscape is also another vector-based program that works with an open format. So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I was just thinking about the form of the UI. :-) David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Michel, 2010/10/21 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net Le 2010-10-21 03:25, David Nelson a écrit : Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 16:50, David Nelsoncomme...@traduction.biz wrote: If you're a power user, one might prefer to have a purely icon/tooltip-based interface? Actually, one program UI that I personally find nicely laid out is Inkscape... Obviously, this would be more of a power user's layout, and you could only really offer it if LibO had themes/skins, because it probably wouldn't be to everyone's taste... David Nelson Very nice indeed. However, I still haven't found a way to do anything significant with it whereas I have no such problems with Draw or Visio. But it brings the other question: Inkscape is also another vector-based program that works with an open format. So should't LibreOffice drop the Draw module and work instead toward a full integration with Inkscape? I'd like LibO to keep Draw. As I see it, Draw and Inkscape are suited for different purposes. Draw is mainly for page layout/design (like MS Publisher) and maybe a little for diagramming (like MS Visio). Inkscape, on the other hand, has always been more oriented towards graphic designers Still, it'd be great if LibO had perfect SVG support. :) -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
RE: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
I'm not a programmer but... If you make a choice for the end users to choose what UI they should use. Before using LibreOffice, a dialog box will show up saying what UI do you prefer. Classic or Modern (Just make sure put a description as tool tips) so there will be no depreciation of UI's whether classic or not. Just an idea... -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
If wee want a really customizable UI the best way is to go to something like Mocilla XULL adapted to LibO, but is needed to put limitations to the customization of what can be done to make the core and a UI with a good decoupling and prevent a bloated system ( basically limiting it exclusively to the UI ) and this is need to be independent of the pluggings for LibO but at the same time it needs to be used in the pluggings for their user interface. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-19 07:54, Xi Embalsado a écrit : I'm not a programmer but... If you make a choice for the end users to choose what UI they should use. Before using LibreOffice, a dialog box will show up saying what UI do you prefer. Classic or Modern (Just make sure put a description as tool tips) so there will be no depreciation of UI's whether classic or not. Just an idea... A customizable interface is great, but I think a few pitfalls should be avoided: 1. The default interface should be simple (not dummed down) and visually appealing because casual users want something that works and will not bother with downloadable themes and extensions, nor will they care about customizing menus and icons. 2. Customization should be available for the general user who does not have administrative privileges. -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
In data 19 ottobre 2010 alle ore 14:35:45, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis el...@users.sourceforge.net ha scritto: If wee want a really customizable UI the best way is to go to something like Mocilla XULL adapted to LibO I know people who would kill because of XUL slowness in Moz UI. :) -- Gianluca Turconi -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
2010/10/19 Gianluca Turconi m...@letturefantastiche.com In data 19 ottobre 2010 alle ore 14:35:45, Carlos Jose Lenarts Ramis el...@users.sourceforge.net ha scritto: If wee want a really customizable UI the best way is to go to something like Mocilla XULL adapted to LibO I know people who would kill because of XUL slowness in Moz UI. :) -- Gianluca Turconi -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 The slowness is not from XUL as user interface is that all the application is written in XUL+JavaScript. -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi everyone, I put up another post: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/citrus-page-selection/ . It's quite short this time. (I'm putting it up because Alexandro Colorado mentioned being able to change the orientation of an OOo page, without needing to do so many clicks and changing styles under the thread LibO roadmap?) -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Charles, 2010/10/17 Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com On 2010-10-15 7:33 PM, Christoph Noack wrote: Charles mentioned that choice is best ... that is true if people really know what they want and how to adapt something in their given situation. Many software products miss that the majority of their users doesn't fall into that category :-) So to prepare an interaction concept that it works right from the start for most people, that is the real hard part. So allow for three 'modes': 1. Legacy (the current Menus/Toolbars style), 2. Newfangled (ribbon, or whatever it is to be called), and 3. Custom (allows the user to basically mix/match and customize whatever they want), with a big fat scary warning with a default of NO/CANCEL, that will prevent any casual user from enabling it... How about just adding a Revert button? Or, better yet, how about having the customizations saveable as a file. One would be able to: 1) revert back to the original at any time; 2) easily have his/her custom UI on as many computers as he/she'd want to; 3) download a UI designed specifically for his/her needs. -- Best regards, Charles -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) How about just adding a Revert button? Or, better yet, how about having the customizations saveable as a file. One would be able to: 1) revert back to the original at any time; 2) easily have his/her custom UI on as many computers as he/she'd want to; 3) download a UI designed specifically for his/her needs. This sounds fine to me. David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 15/10/10 10:01, Mirek M. wrote: Hi Sveinn 2010/10/15 Sveinn í Fellisvei...@nett.is Þann fös 15.okt 2010 08:29, skrifaði Jean Hollis Weber: On Fri, 2010-10-15, David Nelson wrote: IMHO, LibO needs something that is quite new and a bold departure... Please keep in mind that a lot of people do not want the user interface to change too much. One reason they love OOo is that its UI is like the older versions of MSO (2003 and before). I get mail all the time from people saying please tell me they're not going to change OOo too much! Well, maybe if OOo doesn't change, and LibO does, that's okay. Something for everyone: the oldsters and the youngsters.grin Why not have such things user configurable (skins?/themes?). then one could choose Classic OOo interface, Interactive Ribbon* interface, Widescreen Sidebars interface, Minimalistic Netbook interface etc. If done correctly it should not bloat the software too much. I'd prefer this to be done via extensions, keep LibO light with only the important features. Definitely would be nice, though. *Ribbon is maybe trademarked ? MS has a patent pending on it. They're welcome to it!!! -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 17/10/10 17:37, AG wrote: On 16/10/10 08:05, Mirek M. wrote: Hi David, Here's an experimental mock-up of how panes might be managed: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/citrus-possible-solution-to-pane/ 2010/10/15 David Nelsoncomme...@traduction.biz Hi, :-) One thing missing from LibO is the ability to split one window showing 2 / 3 / X different docs... I spend a lot of time proofreading and comparing docs... David Nelson -- Actually David, that +does+ look like a very useful option for comparative work among multiple documents. Good idea. +1 AG Doh - not David, sorry - I meant Mirek (ooops!) AG -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-15 7:33 PM, Christoph Noack wrote: Charles mentioned that choice is best ... that is true if people really know what they want and how to adapt something in their given situation. Many software products miss that the majority of their users doesn't fall into that category :-) So to prepare an interaction concept that it works right from the start for most people, that is the real hard part. So allow for three 'modes': 1. Legacy (the current Menus/Toolbars style), 2. Newfangled (ribbon, or whatever it is to be called), and 3. Custom (allows the user to basically mix/match and customize whatever they want), with a big fat scary warning with a default of NO/CANCEL, that will prevent any casual user from enabling it... -- Best regards, Charles -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Michel, 2010/10/16 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net 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. :) That's okay. My mock-up centered around Ubuntu's Ambiance theme, which has dark menus. The theme should be different for Windows, Mac OS X, and various Linux themes. 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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi David, Here's an experimental mock-up of how panes might be managed: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/citrus-possible-solution-to-pane/ 2010/10/15 David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz Hi, :-) One thing missing from LibO is the ability to split one window showing 2 / 3 / X different docs... I spend a lot of time proofreading and comparing docs... David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi all, i already asked a little bit around for the GUI remake and I'm liking Mireks UI proposals. I think it's about time to start a seperate mailinglist for the UI of LO so we can focus on this project. And all out there who don't like to have a new UI, don't bash this project. If you ask nicely there is every time to make the themeable LO. Like Firefox or all other Opensourceprogramms. I'm for the idea, that every user himself can decide which theme he use. A new better Ergnomic UI or the old UI or a lighter UI, Mike -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-16 09:55, Mike Houben a écrit : Hi all, i already asked a little bit around for the GUI remake and I'm liking Mireks UI proposals. I think it's about time to start a seperate mailinglist for the UI of LO so we can focus on this project. And all out there who don't like to have a new UI, don't bash this project. If you ask nicely there is every time to make the themeable LO. Like Firefox or all other Opensourceprogramms. I'm for the idea, that every user himself can decide which theme he use. A new better Ergnomic UI or the old UI or a lighter UI, Mike Thanks Mike, it would be nice if LibO could accommodate everyone like this. Great work! Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, just gonna add +1 on the list of the people saying the UI should support theming. Regarding the difficulty to maintain several UIs, I guess having the user themselves create the theme, rate and update them would have a good chance of making the problem self-solvable. Outdated UIs stop being maintained, themes that are up-to-date, popular or high-rated get on top of some display list. Honestly, I don't see this not working on a project of the size and importance of LibreOffice. -Thiago On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote: Le 2010-10-16 09:55, Mike Houben a écrit : Hi all, i already asked a little bit around for the GUI remake and I'm liking Mireks UI proposals. I think it's about time to start a seperate mailinglist for the UI of LO so we can focus on this project. And all out there who don't like to have a new UI, don't bash this project. If you ask nicely there is every time to make the themeable LO. Like Firefox or all other Opensourceprogramms. I'm for the idea, that every user himself can decide which theme he use. A new better Ergnomic UI or the old UI or a lighter UI, Mike Thanks Mike, it would be nice if LibO could accommodate everyone like this. Great work! Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 16:29, Jean Hollis Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote: Please keep in mind that a lot of people do not want the user interface to change too much. One reason they love OOo is that its UI is like the older versions of MSO (2003 and before). I get mail all the time from people saying please tell me they're not going to change OOo too much! How about a skinnable \ themable LibO? Probably not a new idea, but I'd love to see it... David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Jon, 2010/10/15 Jon Hamkins hamk...@alumni.caltech.edu On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Jon The main reason why most toolbars aren't vertical is because most languages read horizontally, and therefore it makes most sense to put text horizontally, not vertically, to make it simple to read. Icon-only toolbars, like the Insert toolbar/Drawing toolbox, and sidebar are vertical. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Þann fös 15.okt 2010 08:29, skrifaði Jean Hollis Weber: On Fri, 2010-10-15, David Nelson wrote: IMHO, LibO needs something that is quite new and a bold departure... Please keep in mind that a lot of people do not want the user interface to change too much. One reason they love OOo is that its UI is like the older versions of MSO (2003 and before). I get mail all the time from people saying please tell me they're not going to change OOo too much! Well, maybe if OOo doesn't change, and LibO does, that's okay. Something for everyone: the oldsters and the youngsters.grin Why not have such things user configurable (skins?/themes?). then one could choose Classic OOo interface, Interactive Ribbon* interface, Widescreen Sidebars interface, Minimalistic Netbook interface etc. If done correctly it should not bloat the software too much. *Ribbon is maybe trademarked ? Regards, Sveinn í Felli -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) 2010/10/15 Jon Hamkins hamk...@alumni.caltech.edu The main reason why most toolbars aren't vertical is because most languages read horizontally, and therefore it makes most sense to put text horizontally, not vertically, to make it simple to read. Icon-only toolbars, like the Insert toolbar/Drawing toolbox, and sidebar are vertical. If you're a power user, one might prefer to have a purely icon/tooltip-based interface? David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) One thing missing from LibO is the ability to split one window showing 2 / 3 / X different docs... I spend a lot of time proofreading and comparing docs... David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Sveinn 2010/10/15 Sveinn í Felli svei...@nett.is Þann fös 15.okt 2010 08:29, skrifaði Jean Hollis Weber: On Fri, 2010-10-15, David Nelson wrote: IMHO, LibO needs something that is quite new and a bold departure... Please keep in mind that a lot of people do not want the user interface to change too much. One reason they love OOo is that its UI is like the older versions of MSO (2003 and before). I get mail all the time from people saying please tell me they're not going to change OOo too much! Well, maybe if OOo doesn't change, and LibO does, that's okay. Something for everyone: the oldsters and the youngsters.grin Why not have such things user configurable (skins?/themes?). then one could choose Classic OOo interface, Interactive Ribbon* interface, Widescreen Sidebars interface, Minimalistic Netbook interface etc. If done correctly it should not bloat the software too much. I'd prefer this to be done via extensions, keep LibO light with only the important features. Definitely would be nice, though. *Ribbon is maybe trademarked ? MS has a patent pending on it. Regards, Sveinn í Felli -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010, David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz wrote: Hi, :-) One thing missing from LibO is the ability to split one window showing 2 / 3 / X different docs... I spend a lot of time proofreading and comparing docs... Although you can't put up two documents in one window, you can have two windows open, either for different docs or for different views of the same doc, and arrange them on the screen however you like. Of course, it helps if you have a large monitor (mine is 27). I don't see any advantage of one window with multiple docs, though I'll admit it's been many years since I used a program that did that so I may be missing something. What *is* the advantage from your POV? --Jean -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Þann fös 15.okt 2010 09:07, skrifaði Jean Weber: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010, David Nelsoncomme...@traduction.biz wrote: Hi, :-) One thing missing from LibO is the ability to split one window showing 2 / 3 / X different docs... I spend a lot of time proofreading and comparing docs... Although you can't put up two documents in one window, you can have two windows open, either for different docs or for different views of the same doc, and arrange them on the screen however you like. Of course, it helps if you have a large monitor (mine is 27). I don't see any advantage of one window with multiple docs, though I'll admit it's been many years since I used a program that did that so I may be missing something. What *is* the advantage from your POV? This is how it used to be some time ago in MSO (and I think OOo): multiple documents tiled/cascading inside one program window, with *one set of toolbars and menus* - thus maximizing screen estate. Can be confusing if the theme does not distinguish well between active/inactive documents, but quite productive if you got many or long toolbars (say Anapraseus for translations) arranged along the top of the main window. Arranging two docs side by side with two sets of toolbars/menus make the menus wrap/be partially hidden. Sveinn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 17:07, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see any advantage of one window with multiple docs, though I'll admit it's been many years since I used a program that did that so I may be missing something. What *is* the advantage from your POV? 2 different windows equals 2 duplicate sets of controls and possibly lots of screen clutter. Also, you have to move/resize 2 independent windows although they are, for me, 1 single working environment. This road warrior only packs a 15 laptop. Plus what about portability to multiple different appliances and form factors, now and coming in the future? 0.2 cents :-) David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-14 6:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, This is the first I've heard of this... do you have a link to details? -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-15 4:29 AM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: Please keep in mind that a lot of people do not want the user interface to change too much. One reason they love OOo is that its UI is like the older versions of MSO (2003 and before). I get mail all the time from people saying please tell me they're not going to change OOo too much! It would be nice if the user could choose, but maintaining two totally different UI's might be a lot of (too much?) work... -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-15 3:11 AM, Jon Hamkins wrote: Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Agree, but a choice would be best... flexibility is always good, so I would hope that the user would be able to do one or the other or both (some combination). Make each toolbar a customizable widget that can be placed anywhere - even detached and anchored to the edge (sides, top or bottom) of the monitor/screen. It would be nice to be able to edit them similar to how you can modify toolbars in Firefox/Thunderbird - just drag-n-drop. An added bonus would be the ability to set them to auto-hide/show on mouse-over, like you can do for the Task Bar, and the Menu bars in Firefox/Thunderbird (using the Hide Menubar extension). -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-15 4:41 AM, Mirek M. wrote: The main reason why most toolbars aren't vertical is because most languages read horizontally, and therefore it makes most sense to put text horizontally, not vertically, to make it simple to read. Make buttons the way Firefox/Thunderbird do - text label below the icon - then let the user choose. For people with large widescreen monitors, having a wide(r) vertical toolbar wide enough to hold both the button icon and the text label would be perfectly fine. -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 19:58, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote: On 2010-10-15 5:20 AM, David Nelson wrote: 2 different windows equals 2 duplicate sets of controls and possibly lots of screen clutter. Also, you have to move/resize 2 independent windows although they are, for me, 1 single working environment. This road warrior only packs a 15 laptop. I thought he was basically talking about a tabbed interface (which wouldn't suffer these problems)? No, we were talking about having multiple (or at least 2) docs open in different panes within the same window, rather like MS Word's (2010) proofreading mode... David Nelson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 2010-10-15 8:12 AM, David Nelson wrote: No, we were talking about having multiple (or at least 2) docs open in different panes within the same window, rather like MS Word's (2010) proofreading mode... Oh right, tabbed docs are still viewed separately/individually... never mind... -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-14 18:03, Mirek M. acrit:Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro:http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/Hello,I wonder what is the interest of Microsoft and others, including you, to replace menus with a ribbon-like interface. I think it brings the worst in terms of usability. Why?We have grown to use a certain menu organization. File, Edit, Format, Tools, Windows and Help are, in that order, fairly standard menu items in all applications, and even the basic list of menu items is even fairly standardized. The ribbon interface changes that to a certain extent and requires a relearning process.There are a few menu items that are easily displayed with icons, but most icons are either very hard to read or require a lot of real estate or both. Look at Microsoft Word or at WordPad on System 7 and look at icons used for page or paragraph margins, or for search and replace (very similar to the one for spelling). Because of that, Ms Office 2010 and WordPad adds text below many icons (more real estate) and a tool tip which is basically the former menu item.Because of real estate requirements, there are a limited number of buttons that may be displayed on a screen, whether it is with a traditional set of buttonsla Office 3.2 or with a ribbonla Microsoft Office 2007-2010. So there is a need for multiple menus that call different ribbons like Ms Office. or buttons that need still another action like custom margins.Using a typical menu item requires one move with the mouse: move it to the top to select the menu and slide it toward the menu item, then release. Sub menus require a little more dexterity.On the other hand, using a typical ribbon "menu" item requires a move and two clicks: a first click at the top to select the proper ribbon, then a click on the proper icon. And because of the limited real estate, it is more likely that one then falls onto yet another dialogue box.A traditional tool bar is always there; so its commands may be accessed very quickly. But it works only because of its limited number of icons.So what would be the best approach? Probably a mix of both systems.A traditional menu system for structured commands. In a word processor, I see comprehensive commands like Page setup, Paragraph setup, Font setup, Style setup (with a dialog box like that of Office 2003), Table setup, etc. Simple commands like "Align to the left" could either be in a submenu or even forgotten altogether because they already are accessible through the Paragraph Setup dialog box. Displaying them in a submenu makes learning and training easier : the command is seen, its shortcut is seen, etc.If a ribbon-like approach is used, there should be shortcuts not only for items, but also for each of the ribbons. For instance, I should be able to press alt-F for the File ribbon, alt-E to show the Edit ribbon, etc... and each of these shortcuts should become as standard as control-Z, X, C and V for the basic cut and paste possibilities.Of course, control-C for Cut and control-shift-L (or control-L) for Align-left should also exist for a direct access to menus.Icons are good when the graphic is obvious to all and when clicking on it has a direct result. One of the major pitfalls I currently see is that most are non-configurable (same problem with Microsoft Office and OpenOffice). So for me, the Left-Align and Bold icons work (but the keyboard shortcuts are so quicker), but the bullet icon doesn't work because it does not use my preferred settings: I would like it to apply my "Bullet 1" setting (usually a hanging indent of 1 pica with no further indent, but some documents have a different style definition). Ditto for the 5 or 6 different Page Setting icons that are defined in Ms Word 2007: none of them have the margins I need for my documents!How would a mixed system work?One way to do it would be to have the menus first, followed by ribbons. For instance, the new LibreOffice would have File-Edit-Display (maybe)-Insert-Format-Table-Tools-Window menus, then Basic (file and edit ribbon items)-Insert-Format (document, paragraph and text items)-Table ribbons. The menu could appear either on a single line or on two lines if/when the window is too narrow.Finally, should a ribbon sit on the right or at the top? Why not have it either way? The ribbon is a glorified toolbar and traditional toolbars have worked in either position, either docked or undocked. So why not have the "ribbon menus" call a toolbar anyway?By the way, since we talk of a new interface, one aspect I don't like of OpenOffice 3.x are the toolbars that appear and disappear according to paragraph
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-15 05:22, SveinnFelli acrit:This is how it used to be some time ago in MSO (and I think OOo): multiple documents tiled/cascading inside one program window, with *one set of toolbars and menus* - thus maximizing screen estate.Can be confusing if the theme does not distinguish well between active/inactive documents, but quite productive if you got many or long toolbars (say Anapraseus for translations) arranged along the top of the main window.Arranging two docs side by side with two sets of toolbars/menus make the menus wrap/be partially hidden.SveinnPros and cons: it works well on a single screen, but not as well on a dual-monitor setup.For document revision, a system that allows one to slide both documents in synch is great, as long as there is an easy to remember shortcut that allows one to move only one of the windows.I never use it with Ms Office basically because each time I want to move a single window I have to go through the menus to unsynch, move the window and resynch.--Michel gagnonmic...@mgagnon.netmontral (Qubec, Canada)mgagnon.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Michel, Fyi, your post is extremely difficult to read due to poor formatting (no line-wrapping and more importantly no paragraph breaks). Charles On 2010-10-15 10:03 AM, Michel Gagnon wrote: Le 2010-10-14 18:03, Mirek M. acrit:Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro:http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/Hello,I wonder what is the interest of Microsoft and others, including you, to replace menus with a ribbon-like interface. I think it brings the worst in terms of usability. Why?We have grown to use a certain menu organization. File, Edit, Format, Tools, Windows and Help are, in that order, fairly standard menu items in all applications, and even the basic list of menu items is even fairly standardized. The ribbon interface changes that to a certain extent and requires a relearning process.There are a few menu items that are easily displayed with icons, but most icons are either very hard to read or require a lot of real estate or both. Look at Microsoft Word or at WordPad on System 7 and look at icons used for page or paragraph margins, or for search and replace (very similar to the one for spelling). Because of that, Ms Office 2010 and WordPad adds text below many icons (more real estate) and a tool tip which is basically the former menu item.Because of real estate requirements, there are a limited number of buttons that may be displayed on a screen, whether it is with a traditional set of buttonsla Office 3.2 or with a ribbonla Microsoft Office 2007-2010. So there is a need for multiple menus that call different ribbons like Ms Office. or buttons that need still another action like custom margins.Using a typical menu item requires one move with the mouse: move it to the top to select the menu and slide it toward the menu item, then release. Sub menus require a little more dexterity.On the other hand, using a typical ribbon menu item requires a move and two clicks: a first click at the top to select the proper ribbon, then a click on the proper icon. And because of the limited real estate, it is more likely that one then falls onto yet another dialogue box.A traditional tool bar is always there; so its commands may be accessed very quickly. But it works only because of its limited number of icons.So what would be the best approach? Probably a mix of both systems.A traditional menu system for structured commands. In a word processor, I see comprehensive commands like Page setup, Paragraph setup, Font setup, Style setup (with a dialog box like that of Office 2003), Table setup, etc. Simple commands like Align to the left could either be in a submenu or even forgotten altogether because they already are accessible through the Paragraph Setup dialog box. Displaying them in a submenu makes learning and training easier : the command is seen, its shortcut is seen, etc.If a ribbon-like approach is used, there should be shortcuts not only for items, but also for each of the ribbons. For instance, I should be able to press alt-F for the File ribbon, alt-E to show the Edit ribbon, etc... and each of these shortcuts should become as standard as control-Z, X, C and V for the basic cut and paste possibilities.Of course, control-C for Cut and control-shift-L (or control-L) for Align-left should also exist for a direct access to menus.Icons are good when the graphic is obvious to all and when clicking on it has a direct result. One of the major pitfalls I currently see is that most are non-configurable (same problem with Microsoft Office and OpenOffice). So for me, the Left-Align and Bold icons work (but the keyboard shortcuts are so quicker), but the bullet icon doesn't work because it does not use my preferred settings: I would like it to apply my Bullet 1 setting (usually a hanging indent of 1 pica with no further indent, but some documents have a different style definition). Ditto for the 5 or 6 different Page Setting icons that are defined in Ms Word 2007: none of them have the margins I need for my documents!How would a mixed system work?One way to do it would be to have the menus first, followed by ribbons. For instance, the new LibreOffice would have File-Edit-Display (maybe)-Insert-Format-Table-Tools-Window menus, then Basic (file and edit ribbon items)-Insert-Format (document, paragraph and text items)-Table ribbons. The menu could appear either on a single line or on two lines if/when the window is too narrow.Finally, should a ribbon sit on the right or at the top? Why not have it either way? The ribbon is a glorified toolbar and traditional toolbars have worked in either position, either docked or undocked. So why not have the ribbon menus call a toolbar anyway?By the way, since we talk of a new interface, one aspect I don't like of OpenOffice 3.x are the toolbars that appear and disappear according
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-15 03:11, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Jon Let's not forget that many users in developing countries do not have access to large screens. 17inch screens are still very much in use and sometimes smaller. I don't think that this group of users need to be marginalised by more expensive hardware considerations. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On Saturday 16 Oct 2010 06:29:06 Michel Gagnon wrote: Le 2010-10-15 13:00, Charles Marcus a écrit : Michel, Fyi, your post is extremely difficult to read due to poor formatting (no line-wrapping and more importantly no paragraph breaks). I will try to find the source of the problem later tonight. I wrote it with quite a few paragraph breaks and a few accented letters. All of that disappeared. Obviously what you received is unreadable. Just use plain text in your email client, switch off the HTML Or use another email client like Thunderbird. Pegasus can be problematic Cheers GL -- Graham Lauder, OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant. INGOTs Assessor Trainer (International Grades in Open Technologies) www.theingots.org -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
On 10/15/2010 11:25 AM, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-15 03:11, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Let's not forget that many users in developing countries do not have access to large screens. 17inch screens are still very much in use and sometimes smaller. I don't think that this group of users need to be marginalised by more expensive hardware considerations. Actually, I was also thinking of small screens. I have a 13 laptop, but it is widescreen - by which I mean the aspect ratio is 16:9, not 4:3. It really cuts into the available working height of a document when there is a title bar, a menu bar, a couple of rows of tool bars, a horizontal scroll bar, a bottom tool/zoom bar, and possibly a ruler. Currently, the toolbars are movable to the sides, which helps me a lot. I hope any new UI for LibO keeps this kind of flexibility. Jon -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-15 14:43, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/15/2010 11:25 AM, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-15 03:11, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Let's not forget that many users in developing countries do not have access to large screens. 17inch screens are still very much in use and sometimes smaller. I don't think that this group of users need to be marginalised by more expensive hardware considerations. Actually, I was also thinking of small screens. I have a 13 laptop, but it is widescreen - by which I mean the aspect ratio is 16:9, not 4:3. It really cuts into the available working height of a document when there is a title bar, a menu bar, a couple of rows of tool bars, a horizontal scroll bar, a bottom tool/zoom bar, and possibly a ruler. Currently, the toolbars are movable to the sides, which helps me a lot. I hope any new UI for LibO keeps this kind of flexibility. Jon Sorry, I had forgotten to mention the obvious, laptops. Thanks for the input. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
First post detailing a specific feature -- the menu: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/the-citrus-menu/ 2010/10/15 Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com Le 2010-10-15 14:43, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/15/2010 11:25 AM, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-15 03:11, Jon Hamkins a écrit : On 10/14/2010 03:03 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ Given the prevalence of wide screen displays, I always wondered why the tool bars are often placed on the top and bottom. It's seems more logical to place them on the left or right, where there is more space. Let's not forget that many users in developing countries do not have access to large screens. 17inch screens are still very much in use and sometimes smaller. I don't think that this group of users need to be marginalised by more expensive hardware considerations. Actually, I was also thinking of small screens. I have a 13 laptop, but it is widescreen - by which I mean the aspect ratio is 16:9, not 4:3. It really cuts into the available working height of a document when there is a title bar, a menu bar, a couple of rows of tool bars, a horizontal scroll bar, a bottom tool/zoom bar, and possibly a ruler. Currently, the toolbars are movable to the sides, which helps me a lot. I hope any new UI for LibO keeps this kind of flexibility. Jon Sorry, I had forgotten to mention the obvious, laptops. Thanks for the input. Marc -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgfor 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 -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi Michel, 2010/10/15 Michel Gagnon mic...@mgagnon.net Hello, I wonder what is the interest of Microsoft and others, including you, to replace menus with a ribbon-like interface. I think it brings the worst in terms of usability. Why?We have grown to use a certain menu organization. File, Edit, Format, Tools, Windows and Help are, in that order, fairly standard menu items in all applications, and even the basic list of menu items is even fairly standardized. The ribbon interface changes that to a certain extent and requires a relearning process.There are a few menu items that are easily displayed with icons, but most icons are either very hard to read or require a lot of real estate or both. Look at Microsoft Word or at WordPad on System 7 and look at icons used for page or paragraph margins, or for search and replace (very similar to the one for spelling). Because of that, Ms Office 2010 and WordPad adds text below many icons (more real estate) and a tool tip which is basically the former menu item.Because of real estate requirements, there are a limited number of buttons that may be displayed on a screen, whether it is with a traditional set of buttonsla Office 3.2 or with a ribbonla Microsoft Office 2007-2010. So there is a need for multiple menus that call different ribbons like Ms Office. or buttons that need still another action like custom margins.Using a typical menu item requires one move with the mouse: move it to the top to select the menu and slide it toward the menu item, then release. Sub menus require a little more dexterity.On the other hand, using a typical ribbon menu item requires a move and two clicks: a first click at the top to select the proper ribbon, then a click on the proper icon. And because of the limited real estate, it is more likely that one then falls onto yet another dialogue box.A traditional tool bar is always there; so its commands may be accessed very quickly. But it works only because of its limited number of icons.So what would be the best approach? Probably a mix of both systems.A traditional menu system for structured commands. In a word processor, I see comprehensive commands like Page setup, Paragraph setup, Font setup, Style setup (with a dialog box like that of Office 2003), Table setup, etc. Simple commands like Align to the left could either be in a submenu or even forgotten altogether because they already are accessible through the Paragraph Setup dialog box. Displaying them in a submenu makes learning and training easier : the command is seen, its shortcut is seen, etc.If a ribbon-like approach is used, there should be shortcuts not only for items, but also for each of the ribbons. For instance, I should be able to press alt-F for the File ribbon, alt-E to show the Edit ribbon, etc... and each of these shortcuts should become as standard as control-Z, X, C and V for the basic cut and paste possibilities. Of course, control-C for Cut and control-shift-L (or control-L) for Align-left should also exist for a direct access to menus.Icons are good when the graphic is obvious to all and when clicking on it has a direct result. One of the major pitfalls I currently see is that most are non-configurable (same problem with Microsoft Office and OpenOffice). So for me, the Left-Align and Bold icons work (but the keyboard shortcuts are so quicker), but the bullet icon doesn't work because it does not use my preferred settings: I would like it to apply my Bullet 1 setting (usually a hanging indent of 1 pica with no further indent, but some documents have a different style definition). Ditto for the 5 or 6 different Page Setting icons that are defined in Ms Word 2007: none of them have the margins I need for my documents!How would a mixed system work?One way to do it would be to have the menus first, followed by ribbons. For instance, the new LibreOffice would have File-Edit-Display (maybe)-Insert-Format-Table-Tools-Window menus, then Basic (file and edit ribbon items)-Insert-Format (document, paragraph and text items)-Table ribbons. The menu could appear either on a single line or on two lines if/when the window is too narrow.Finally, should a ribbon sit on the right or at the top? Why not have it either way? The ribbon is a glorified toolbar and traditional toolbars have worked in either position, either docked or undocked. So why not have the ribbon menus call a toolbar anyway?By the way, since we talk of a new interface, one aspect I don't like of OpenOffice 3.x are the toolbars that appear and disappear according to paragraph styles. For instance, when bullets are chosen (or a bullet style), the bullet toolbar appears (by default at the top) and shifts all text down 1 cm. Go back to a standard paragraph and it shifts up again. Why not have a user interface made with one or two user-defined toolbars like we currently have on OpenOffice 3.x and Ms Office 2003, plus one toolbar that would be always
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Le 2010-10-15 14:38, Graham Lauder a écrit : O Just use plain text in your email client, switch off the HTML Or use another email client like Thunderbird. Pegasus can be problematic Cheers GL Here is a resend of the message I sent earlier this morning. I am using Thunderbird, just like this morning. It seems automatic detection to see whether the message was using HTML or not did not work. Let's see if it works better when I expressly set the message as text only. (I generally don't have any problems with other text-only lists). Hello, I wonder what is the interest of Microsoft and others in replacing menus with a ribbon-like interface. I think it brings the worst in terms of usability. Why? - We have grown to use a certain menu organization. File, Edit, Format, Tools, Windows and Help are, in that order, fairly standard menu items in all applications, and even the basic list of menu items is even fairly standardized. The ribbon interface changes that to a certain extent and requires a relearning process. -There are a few menu items that are easily displayed with icons, but most icons are either very hard to read or require a lot of real estate or both. Look at Microsoft Word or at WordPad on System 7 and look at icons used for page or paragraph margins, or for search and replace (very similar to the one for spelling). Because of that, Ms Office 2010 and WordPad adds text below many icons (more real estate) and a tool tip which is basically the former menu item. - Because of real estate requirements, there are a limited number of buttons that may be displayed on a screen, whether it is with a traditional set of buttons a la Office 3.2 or with a ribbon a la Microsoft Office 2007-2010. So there is a need for multiple menus that call different ribbons like Ms Office. or buttons that need still another action like custom margins. - Using a typical menu item requires one move with the mouse: move it to the top to select the menu and slide it toward the menu item, then release. Sub menus require a little more dexterity. On the other hand, using a typical ribbon menu item requires a move and two clicks: a first click at the top to select the proper ribbon, then a click on the proper icon. And because of the limited real estate, it is more likely that one then falls onto yet another dialogue box. - A traditional tool bar is always there; so its commands may be accessed very quickly. But it works only because of its limited number of icons. So what would be the best approach? Probably a mix of both systems. - A traditional menu system for structured commands. In a word processor, I see comprehensive commands like Page setup, Paragraph setup, Font setup, Style setup (with a dialog box like that of Office 2003), Table setup, etc. Simple commands like Align to the left could either be in a submenu or even forgotten altogether because they already are accessible through the Paragraph Setup dialog box. Displaying them in a submenu makes learning and training easier : the command is seen, its shortcut is seen, etc. - If a ribbon-like approach is used, there should be shortcuts not only for items, but also for each of the ribbons. For instance, I should be able to press alt-F for the File ribbon, alt-E to show the Edit ribbon, etc... and each of these shortcuts should become as standard as control-Z, X, C and V for the basic cut and paste possibilities. Of course, control-C for Cut and control-shift-L (or control-L) for Align-left should also exist for a direct access to menus. - Icons are good when the graphic is obvious to all and when clicking on it has a direct result. One of the major pitfalls I currently see is that most are non-configurable (same problem with Microsoft Office and OpenOffice). So for me, the Left-Align and Bold icons work (but the keyboard shortcuts are so quicker), but the bullet icon doesn't work for me because it does not use my preferred settings: I would like it to apply my Bullet 1 setting (usually a hanging indent of 1 pica with no further indent, but some documents have a different style definition). Ditto for the 5 or 6 different Page Setting icons that are defined in Ms Word 2007: none of them have the margins I need for my documents, therefore I can't use any of them! How would a mixed system work? One way to do it would be to have the menus first, followed by ribbons. For instance, the new LibreOffice would have File-Edit-Display (maybe)-Insert-Format-Table-Tools-Window menus, then Basic (file and edit ribbon items)-Insert- Format (document, paragraph and text items)-Table ribbons. The menu could appear either on a single line or on two lines if/when the window is too narrow. Finally, should a ribbon sit on the right or at the top? Why not have it either way? The ribbon is a glorified toolbar and traditional toolbars have worked in either position, either docked or undocked. So why not have the ribbon menus call a toolbar anyway? By the way, since we
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi, :-) It's been an interesting thread. I read Mirek's blog posts: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/the-citrus-menu/ I also read the Rennaissance FAQ: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance/FAQ#Official_Statements Different users and devices call for different configurations, but IMHO full-blooded themeability would provide most of the answers. A lot of stuff is already configurable via Tools/Options or the GUI. Gnome gives a lot of control, for instance. However, I'd love to see that taken further in a full-blooded themes/skins system. Given the variety of devices that run a Linux- or Windows-based OS (and the variety of form factors), choice and flexibility are important. But, since LibO is a multi-platform suite, the right solution is delicate to achieve. Marik, IMHO your Citrus menu looks pretty good as one initial approach. I guess I'd need to try it out to say more. UI is an aspect of LibO that interests me a lot. I'd be pleased to help out if you need stuff done on Gimp/Photoshop, or in some other way. Feel free to contact me if you like. David Nelson -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org 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
[tdf-discuss] UI proposal
Hi everyone, Since it seems like LibreOffice won't adopt the UI Oracle's preparing for OOo, I'm starting a massive LibreOffice UI proposal series. Here's the intro: http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/citrus-ui/ -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
