Re: [tdf-discuss] How to pronounce the name (again, sorry)
I saw users having problem pronouncing the software name LibreOffice in Thailand. ... I wrote this last week, but I think it was lost somewhere and never made it to the list: I'm French speaking, and would refer you to these: http://fr.thefreedictionary.com/libre http://en.thefreedictionary.com/office (US flag) The problem I find with these sound files is that they should be slowed down. According to Le Robert (physical dictionary), it is libʀ(ə) Therefore, the phonetic translitteration of the 1st word is libʀ, because the last e is not pronounced as ə, but is muted as the second word is linked to it. The Office part comes from here: http://www.oxfordadvancedlearnersdictionary.com/dictionary/office The complete name should be something like : libʀˈɒfɪsor libʀˈɔːfɪs but I would really like an English-speaking person to correct the Office part. -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Support for Office 2003 file formats (WordML, SpreadsheetML
Le 2011-03-28 15:29, aqualung a écrit : Jaime R. Garza wrote: In my opinion Must, Should, Could, Completely Irrelevant: - *Must*: RTF - *Must*: MS Office 97/2000/XP Binary - *Completely Irrelevant*: MS Office 2003 XML - *Should*: OOXML ECMA-376 / ISO/IEC 29500 Transitional - *Must*: OOXML ISO/IEC 29500 Strict Cheers! Jaime Which one of the above is the .docx file extension produced by MS Office 2007 and 2010? That one is the most important of all IMHO. I also agree that Ms Office 2010 format is coming more and more common and should be a *MUST*. On the other hand, RTF seems so bastard that basic support is probably ok. -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] How to pronounce the name (again, sorry)
I saw users having problem pronouncing the software name LibreOffice in Thailand. I found this pagehttp://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/faq/general-faq/how-do-you-pronounce-libreoffice/that link to Google translate to provide the (official?) pronouncement.http://translate.google.com/#fr|en|LibreOfficeI'm quite surprised with it. I thought it is ˈlɪbə as in liberty orlbr as inhttp://www.thefreedictionary.com/vers+libreSo actually it is ˈliːbreɪ as inhttp://es.thefreedictionary.com/libre, right? (phonetic copy/paste from the website)It would be nice if someone could provide an official pronouncement sound file on the LibreOffice website (and phonetic, for the literate). Since we start to pronounce the name differently here in Thailand.I'm French speaking, and would refer you to these:http://fr.thefreedictionary.com/librehttp://en.thefreedictionary.com/office(US flag)The problem I find with these sound files is that they should be slowed down. According to Le Robert (physical dictionary), it is libʀ(ə) Therefore, the phonetic translitteration of the 1st word islibʀ, because the last e is not pronounced as ə, but is muted as the second word is linked to it.The Office part comes from here:http://www.oxfordadvancedlearnersdictionary.com/dictionary/officeThe complete name should be something like :libʀˈɒfɪs or libʀˈɔːfɪsbut I would really like an English-speaking person to correct the Office part.-- Michel Gagnon –michel@mgagnon.netMontréal (Québec, Canada) –mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] suggestion to improve libreoffice writer
is a quick alignment of two windows side by side and a way to scroll both of them at once. Microsoft has a bit of that in it's compare function, except it doesn't really work because it's too complex to synchronize and de-synchronize both windows. -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: EPS images in ODF documents
Le 2011-01-30 07:10, Magnus Johansson a écrit : Salut Jean-Baptiste, and thank you for your response. How do I insert a high resolution preview in my EPS images? I do not know how to manipulate the EPS files themselves, I just insert the result I get from the other program into OOo and the ODT document. Magnus, All eps files are not created equal, so it's hard to find a single software that would open all eps files and do wonders with it. What eps softwares do you have access to? In the free world, Gimp will do wonders with the few eps files it opens successfully. For a more universal conversion, you could try Illustrator or Photoshop ($$$). All these will convert your file in a tiff or jpeg file at the resolution you want. Do it at 150-300 dpi and you will get great printouts. I haven't tried LibreOffice on that, but OpenOffice 3.2.x didn't work well, on Windows, with eps files that have patterns or fonts in them. -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Version Numbers?
Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit : On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote: As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in peoples minds that we are a separate project. Not now. The programme is not very different from OpenOffice. As long as it feels like OpenOffice, I think that calling it version 1 would be a throw back in history. Many folks would think they are much better with OpenOffice... it is at version 3.3, after all. When (if) a new user interface is developed, then it will be very easy to sell that the new LibreOffice 1 is an entirely new program. -- 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] Re: x86_64 Windows build
Le 2010-11-05 05:10, Ian a écrit : On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 07:52 +, e-letter wrote: LO is never going to overcome m$ products on their own platform(s). Agreed, by the time there is any chance of this the world will have moved to a different platform. In one way it already has since ARM based mobile computer devices massively outnumber x86 now. The biggest market potential by far is mobile devices for ODF to become the default format. Yup. I don't agree totally with that statement. While Microsoft Works is likely to continue to be omnipresent, it is possible for LibreOffice to be a relatively important player on the Windows platform. For instance, Internet Explorer used to be the only browser on Windows computers; look at Firefox which is now a very important player, and Chrome which is making important inroads. As for becoming useful on the phone, I think the cell-phone platform limits a lot the editing functions available. One possibility would be to have a no-frills word processor that would remember all image and style information, yet allow the cell-phone user to write the text as is. This means that a lot of thought and work has to be done before porting it on the phone, and that a good compatible software needs to exist on real computers. One of the strengths of LibreOffice is document compatibility and UI compatibility between platforms. Within limits, the same has to be extended to the newer platforms, otherwise people might as well compose in their e-mail software. -- 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] LibreOffice UI should be tweaked, not reinvented
Le 2010-11-04 04:34, Sebastian Spaeth a écrit : On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 20:55:19 +0100, Johannes Bausch wrote: things concerning tables. We absolutely HAVE to make the user use the stylesheet stuff, and it must be so easy that they start to use it on one-paged documents. Removing the font chooser, and font-size selector would save lots of space that could be replaced with a simple style chooser :) We should not go overboard. While we should _encourage_ people to use styles when they are best used, we should not _force_ them to do so. We will loose the followers we have and not gain any new ones if we impose the right way. Besides, there are times when styles are useful and styles should be used much more than they are by most people. But there are many situations where styles add an unncessary level of complexity and a few times when styles are NOT warranted. For instance: - Take this text and assume I want to emphasize one word. I could simply do Ctl-I and get the text in Italics or define a character style and apply it. The character style may be warranted, but it's a multi-step process, and quite frankly, if I decide further down the road to change the entire text from Cambria to Bodoni, the text in Italics will change accordingly and the text defined with a character style may not change appropriately (it may stay in Cambria Italics). On the other hand, if character styles work properly, I may define a book name style as it would allow me to change all those from one font to another in a jiffy. - In Desktop publishing, there are times when fragments of text are out of context (ad, poster...). I find it easier not to have a base style for these because neither paragraph nor font information is linked to the rest of the text. Finally, if we need to train people to the proper use of word-processing software, I would suggest that emphasis be given, in order to the following nasty habits: – proper use of spaces and punctuation (hyphen vs n-dash vs m-dash); – proper use of indents and tabulations (many people still use spaces or default tabs in succession); – proper use of space before paragraph and paragraph-chaining options such as keep with next paragraph, rather than paragraph returns in series. All these make document modification harder than it needs to be. A couple of short videos might even help educate people very quickly. Speaking of modifications, it is much easier to work with a document that uses the above techniques even if it has no style, than it is to work with an improperly formatted document that has styles. -- 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] LibreOffice UI should be tweaked, not reinvented
Le 2010-11-04 12:30, Jim White a écrit : Quoting Michel Gagnon: Finally, if we need to train people to the proper use of word-processing software, I would suggest that emphasis be given, in order to the following nasty habits: - proper use of spaces and punctuation (hyphen vs n-dash vs m-dash); - proper use of indents and tabulations (many people still use spaces or default tabs in succession); - proper use of space before paragraph and paragraph-chaining options such as keep with next paragraph, rather than paragraph returns in series. The problem is to define proper use. This is an elusive attribute with wide national and cultural differences that would be hard -- if not impossible -- to enforce. Rigidly forcing people to adhere to a proper usage when they have other customs would be *most* offputting. This also starts to move into the minefield of personal taste: I might prefer one style while you might prefer something quite different. P. P., I think you missed Michel's point. The examples he gave of proper use are those formatting features that will make re-formatting easier. If we encourage such proper use through the design of the UI, as well as through education, many will be happier with the product. -JimW I am thinking of training rather than enforcing. Apart from that, I am aware that there are cultural differences and typographical preferences such as the use of a hard space before the colon and semi-colon in French. But while having a 1-cm indent on the first line of a paragraph is a matter of personal taste and cultural preference (for lack of better expression), typing 10 or 20 spaces at the beginning of the first paragraph instead of setting the 1st line indent at 1 cm is NOT a cultural preference. It shows either laziness or a lack of knowledge of the software. And Jim got it right: if using the proper formatting techniques is easy, more people will use it and less training will be needed. -- 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] LibreOffice UI should be tweaked, not reinvented
Le 2010-11-03 03:50, Gianluca Turconi a écrit : Il 02/11/2010 19.13, animesh meher ha scritto: Has anyone considered the UI of IBM Symphony 3, its a step in the right direction . And now that most monitors have larger breath , we can use it to our advantage. Definitely, +1. Here are some screenshots taken from Symphony 3: http://www.lffl.org/2010/02/ibm-lotus-symphony-3-beta-2-ottima.html I have mixed feelings on that. On one hand, if I absolutely have to have all my properties on screen then it makes a very good use of real estate. But there are many times I use the wide screen to my advantage by installing a second window to the right with either my source, internet references, other documents, etc. And in Calc/Excel, I would want an even wider sheet. So properties should either be displayed such as above or in its own window (like Styles and Navigation) that would be dockable. It would more or less follow the traditional OpenOffice / LibreOffice approach. One change I would do, however: if the box is docked, it should be displayed all the time; its content would change depending on whether it's paragraph properties, styles, etc. On the other hand, if it is a window, it should disappear when not needed to minimize screen clutter. Advantages of such a system ? - In Calc, the Properties could be displayed to the right or the bottom, to allow ideal use of real estate. - With dual screens, it is easy to put a window on a second screen. -- 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] Re: Non-removable extensions
Le 2010-11-01 07:34, Michael Meeks a écrit : Hi there, On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 17:53 -0400, Michel Gagnon wrote: however I cannot modify my installation to remove the PDF Import and Persenter Console. So - there are lots of parts of LibreOffice that cannot be removed easily; such as the clipart gallery, or say, the Quattro Pro file filters, or whatever. I know, but those are not extensions. My main beef is that we have a hybrid system, with many components (36 in my case) that appear in the extensions list, yet only one is an extension that really behaves like one, i.e. that can be removed (or added) via Tools – Extensions. In other words, if it is an extension, I should be able to manage it via Tools – Extensions. If it becomes part of the program like the Quattro Pro file filters, then it should not appear in the list of extensions. The more interesting thing to me is - why would you want to remove the PDF Import ? or the Presenter Console ? If there are bugs that make these unususable, or particularly problematic - then, we should fix those instead IMHO. ie. can we fix the bug in the right place ? I used those two extensions as examples. I would not remove PDF Import because I find it rather useful. On the other hand, I am not totally comfortable with the Presenter Console and feel more at ease seeing only the real life presentation on screen. But maybe it is because I am not really comfortable with Impress per se? Regards, -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net 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 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] Splash screen
El 29/10/10 05:10, Ercole Carpanetto escribió: The *perceived* speed of startup is something that should really be considered by the designers here. The perception (rather than an objectively measured reality) is what counts. A typeahead function would help improve the situation. On my slower portable computer, the most frustrating aspect is that I have to wait for 3-4 seconds after the empty document appears before the cursor starts to flash. If I type characters before that ( i.e. before LibreOffice is completely loaded), it often hangs and I have to force-quit and restart the program. -- 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 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] LibO program icon brainstorming
Le 2010-10-29 19:17, Christoph Noack a écrit : * Colors: Blue, green are great. For the orange, yellow and purple color, the lightest shadings seem to be different from its base color (e.g. the lightest orange looks a green on my computer). I'm sure you already invested some time, so this is intended, or? So, how to proceed? May we start to iterate the current LibO colors? Or do you think it might be helpful to further work on your file? At your service, so to say ;-) Cheers, Christoph I don't have that problem at home. However, I wonder why those lighter shades at the bottom of those Second Draft icons. -- 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 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] Better defaults
Le 2010-10-27 09:10, Marc Paré a écrit : Le 2010-10-27 06:21, Sebastian Spaeth a écrit : IMHO we should remove the *registration* completely. We are not after marketing addresses and I don't see a benefit in LibO requiring (or even inviting) users to register. Sebastian From a marketing point of view, not knowing how or from where people are using LibO is working in the dark. LibO is such an essential piece of software, we need to know at the very least where it is being used. ... I am happy to see it gone. I know it is nice to know who uses the software, but statistics collected that way are skewed because large corporations do a silent install and many people (most?) click on don't register. And amongst people who download LibreOffice, we do not know who really uses it and who downloaded it to give it a 2-minute trial. In other words, statistics are useless. On the other hand, the help menu could be improved to add links to one or more of the following: – help forums – User guides (essentially the page that has the current LibO user guides) – Open Document Foundation page. – Maybe a feedback page? -- 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 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] Better defaults
Le 2010-10-26 10:09, Marc Paré a écrit : Le 2010-10-26 09:17, Michel Gagnon a écrit : Other comments: - Hard spaces should be displayed -- or not -- according to the setting made with show hidden characters. Actually, I was pointed to this site yesterday. See if this is what you are trying to achieve. You can change the background colours etc. http://www.johannes-eva.net/index.php?page=ooo_background Marc Marc, I am aware that I can change background colours. However, it is a multi-step process that doesn't work on the fly. By contrast, paragraph marks, tab marks and other hidden characters can be displayed or hidden all together with the toggle commandand Show non-printable characters (control-F10). I would like those background colours to disappear when non-printable characters are hidden, and to reappear when they are displayed. Regards, -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe information: 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] Version numbering in About LibreOffice
Le 2010-10-26 10:24, Marc Paré a écrit : Le 2010-10-26 09:52, Robert Boehm a écrit : But yesmaybe it should say beta on the face of it On 10/26/2010 08:48 AM, Michel Gagnon wrote: Is it possible to write the version number in a way that is understandable by mere mortals? ... Putting Beta somewhere would be a good help. Members are installing the latest Beta2 and are mostly unaware that it is a beta. As you said the current version of LibO is really not meant to be used on a production machine. But they still do it regardless and expect it to be bullet-proof. Marc A good example is Firefox. If one looks at About Firefox, it is written Firefox version 3.6.11, and likewise, the Beta version is written Firefox version 4.0b6. With clear labelling like that, when my mother calls me and has a computer problem, even she is able to know what version of Firefox she is using. That's the kind of precision I would like to see with LibreOffice. OpenOffice 3.2.1 shows a version number, but I remember that OpenOffice 3.0 and 3.1 did not show the version number but only the internal build number (ex.: OOO310m10). -- Michel Gagnon Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net -- Unsubscribe information: 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] Better defaults
Le 2010-10-24 11:40, Marc Paré a écrit : Le 2010-10-24 08:23, RGB ES a écrit : Another example: do you know anyone that use the send by email button? Most possible receivers nowadays still use msoffice so using that button have the only effect that new users come to forums asking why the people to whom they sent the file is not able to open it. I think it is better to completely hide that button. I always remove it, but that's basically because I tend to work in two steps. 1. Write the document and save it 2. Write an e-mail and attach the document. I don't think this would be a good idea. I actually use it extensively, I know of at least dozens of my clients, professionals and amateurs, who use it. Strategically, this would also be the wrong this to do as we are trying to encourage the use of the OASIS opendoc formats. Why would we then sheepishly hide the button that we advocate? There is also a Send .doc button that people may use. I usually tell people to use the send .doc and inform the recipients that there is an opendoc format that will prevent their files from ever being incompatible from MSO. I also encourage them to tell everyone else. We can then all advocate the opendoc formats. It depends who your clients are. Mine are either computer-illiterate or work for companies where some other guy (usually and outside IT resource) has set up their computer and locked it. So I get the phone call that they can't do anything with the document. Contextual toolbars is a nice feature, but many people hate it because these toolbars appears in front of their documents, floating on non useful positions. The first thing I always do when installing a new OOo/LibO version is to anchor those toolbars to the botom of the window. I agree with this, they should not be floating. Isn't there a setting for this? Maybe the original setting should be a bottom anchor. Marc You can get the contextual toolbars non-floating at the bottom by moving them manually the first time they appear. Better to have it done by default, however. With regard to buttons, I would suggest less white space in/around icons. The way the graphics are sized, we could shave 2 to 4 pixels in width and height and make those toolbars more compact, yet keep graphics the same size. -- 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] LibO roadmap?
Le 2010-10-18 04:16, Cedric Bosdonnat a écrit : Hi Alexandro, On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 23:10 -0500, Alexandro Colorado wrote: I am very positive about making improvements on things like Writer, however I don't know many people use the bibliographic features. On the opposite I know about many things that many users used, that could be fixed straight away and improve the usability on many users. ... IMHO there could be small wins here that would help a lot of people to join us (or at least use LibreOffice when they weren't using OOo). Things like being able to change the orientation of an OOo page, without needing to do so many clicks and changing styles and so forth. Sure, We need some nice UI ideas here. The coding shouldn't be too complex as we already have the page styles. ... One way to do it easily would be through a macro command that would insert two page breaks with style change and rotate the page in between. Other features needed in Writer: - Less predefined styles. Ideally, I would prefer to have all functions such as heading level, numbering... , but without the actual style sheets defined. InDesign is fairly good in that regard. At the very least, the numerous Bullets and Number styles (ex.: Bullet 1, bullet 1 beginning, bullet 1 end, bullet 1 next...) This is especially so considering that there also are a separate set of styles for bullets. - Perfect image and spreadsheet insertion in Writer. Right now, it's impossible to do it perfectly when things are transferred in a vectorial format. Amongst other problems, if one inserts a drawing and shrinks it at 50%, fonts are not shrinked (Windows XP and Windows 7). - Insert File should work with standard and Office formats. I.e. one should be able to insert an odt drawing or an ods spreadsheet. In Calc, my wish list includes: - Some way to make equation-writing easier when, for example, complex fractions and trigonometry are involved. Ideally, integrating Math-style equation writing into Calc would help with those crazy equations that I have in engineering. In Impress - A series of default effects that would be easy to pre-configure - A timeline of effects that would be similar to the advanced chronology of MsOffice 2003, but even better. Quite frankly, I find effects even harder to do than in MsOffice 2003. Having a group of lines appearing successively by appearing from the left (normal reading direction) should not require three steps as in MsOffice or 5 steps as in OpenOffice. LONG TERM WISH LIST Finally, a long term wish list would be complete integration of most modules at the document level. In other words, if I make a long report, I would: - Create a text document in a way similar to what is done with Writer. - When I come to tables, I would create a table as I currently do and I will be able to use all character, paragraph and style functions that are in Writer. But I would also be able to use all Calc functions (equations, formatting, etc.), sort either by line or column... exactly as if I had created a Calc sheet. - Similar behaviour for graphics. There is no need for the very limited graphic abilities of Writer (or Calc) because we would define a graphic zone and in that zone, all Draw functions would work as if I had created a drawing in Draw. - All these parts would be saved in the same Writer document because after all, they are all part of the same report; yet, I would still be able to fully edit all parts of the document from within the same file. Similar behaviour would be expected from other modules. For example, if I do a major spreadsheet , I should be able to use the word processor in a cell or in a group of cells. Likewise, Impress would often benefit from paragraph styles as defined in Writer and full-fledge spreadsheets. -- 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] unsubscribed posters
Le 2010-10-21 01:26, Florian Effenberger a écrit : Hi, Charles Marcus wrote on 2010-10-20 14.18: (including lists) for the long run... Anyway, at a minimum, I would dearly love to see simple list specific pages for subscribing/unsubscribing. Mailman generates these out of the box, so its not like this should be a lot of work - unless mlmmj doesn't provide such pages? If not, then I think it would be worth it to make the move to mailman just for that. mlmmj doesn't provide these pages, that's correct. We need to find another way of creating it. Switching to Mailman is not possible for the reasons stated earlier, them being 1. missing virtual domain support (no same list name at multiple domains) 2. no easy moderation via e-mail. Florian I know a few other lists that allow subscription via a web page and that also allow one to be registered but with web-only access. That would allow the occasional poster to subscribe and see answers on the web without getting swamped by e-mail for ever and ever... -- 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] Basic question about Oracle asking OOo community members to leave
Le 2010-10-20 11:25, BRM a écrit : Someone said: Second - the current idea is that organizsations could join indirectly through their member's (staff) contributions. This idea works quite well for e.g. Gnome foundation. There are other models and we need to find something to make organizations happy to join. We must take responsibility to discuss this as well. BRM replied: But that's the point. Oracle may want to participate as an organization and no indirectly through its staff members. That part alone may be what is causing some of the riff Actually, if a coop-style system is designed, it might be easier to control corporations than individuals. Compare Scenario One where Oracle or Google sends 100 employees-contributors as members of the Foundation, vs Scenario Two where Oracle and Google are members and have a single vote, but none of their employees may become members of the Foundation unless they work on their own. -- Michel Gagnon – mic...@mgagnon.net mailto:mic...@mgagnon.net Montréal (Québec, Canada) – mgagnon.net 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
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] Multilingualism and discussions
Le 2010-10-19 21:10, Marc Paré a écrit : Hmmm... then, the fact remains that a multilingual mailist model will always be difficult to accomplish. The amount of energy spent on translating from one language to another would certainly affect the overall effectiveness of the group. Satisfying everyone will be difficult. I would suggest trying to build and maintain a robust reporting model from the localised groups to the respective mailists. Adding the complexity of language translation (as well as cultural idiosyncrasies) in the mix IMHO would not be productive. As much as I would love to see a universal list in all languages, I agree with you that common lists using English as the lingua franca are probably what works best. Obviously, we should accept without any complaint that some people whose English is not to par might post in other languages, but the aim should not to have 200 translations of each and every message. In an ideal world, international lists would be in Esperanto, but I doubt many list members would understand anything. Actually, I think the pitfall to avoid is that problems specific to the English version or with English-language marketing should be posted to their respective regional or linguistic lists and not on the worldwide lists. U.S. and U.K. are two regions, just like France and Spain. -- 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] Multilingualism and discussions
Le 2010-10-19 11:21, jonathon a écrit : On 10/19/2010 09:25 AM, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote: There is no need for a global user list and the global discussion list should not be a mere discussion list but a policy list Global lists should be multi-lingual. Use it for support or discussion, or marketing for languages or regions that don't yet have a dedicated list. Also use them for global issues. If somebody wants to post support questions in toki pona, or Enochian or Klingon on the general global support list, let them do so. # There is a certain irony in having a multilingual product name, but a requirement that the global list be monolingual. jonathon True. But at the same time, people who write questions in Arhamaic should not expect to receive too many answers. Besides, with a list that is set in ISO-8859-1 rather than in UTF-8, there is a limit to the number of languages that may be displayed reliably. -- 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] Re: LibO roadmap?
Le 2010-10-18 11:51, Mounier Jacques a écrit : Hi everyone, * Improvements to the footnotes. ... I actually like them with 1[tab]TextOfNote, but I don't mind more flexibility. * Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style There is one fairly simple solution, which is to add space BEFORE paragraphs rather than after them. Ever since Word 6 I have always defined styles that way and it solves most problems : I put more space before headers, only 6-pt space before normal paragraphs and 2 or 3-pt space before bullets, and I seldom correct these values. Which brings a few other suggestions: - Program default styles with some space before the paragraph and no space after them. - Program less default styles. - Allow one to define default tabs with any value: right now it is impossible to define them at less than 1.18 picas (or 0.2 inches or 0,5 cm). Using that default makes hanging indents very wide indeed. - Make the whole process of defining hanging indents much simpler. - Solve existing bugs in character style sheets. Finally, one improvement in marketing is to better explain style sheets and especially what to do with hanging bullets and numbering. -- 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
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
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 or other random options. 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 there, albeit with variable content (a.k.a. the ribbon). Users would decide where they want that big grey box and LibreOffice would fill in the proper icons. -- 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
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
