From The Document Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


  • Date/Time: 2012-04-01, 1400 GMT (supposed start time)
  • Location: IRC, freenode, channel #libreoffice-design


  • alexanderW
  • Mirek2
  • astron


(Some hellos went missing because I had to reconnect.– Astron)
[14:05] <alexanderW> Someone cleaned up the whiteboard overview o.O
[14:05] <Mirek2> I tried to -- just put some order into thins
[14:05] <Mirek2> things
[14:06] <Mirek2> the whiteboards themselves are untouched, though
[14:06] <alexanderW> At least that's a start
[14:07] <astron> look good
[14:07] <alexanderW> What is a bit disappointing is that probably no whiteboard has been implemented yet :/
[14:07] <Mirek2> I've been thinking about a unified whiteboard template
[14:07] <astron> ah well take a look under archive...
[14:08] <astron> i attempted to archive soome thigns that arent that relevant any more about 2 mths ago
[14:08] <astron> -o -gn+ng
[14:09] <Mirek2> the problem is, though, that the whiteboards that have been implemented have started out as developer efforts, not as design whiteboards
[14:09] <astron> the thing is that we should try to stay relevant to the devs.
[14:10] <Mirek2> exactly
[14:10] <astron> which means trying to see what they want changed.
[14:10] <alexanderW> yep
[14:10] <Mirek2> definitely
[14:10] <astron> i mean the stuff where kendy pinged you about the status bar –that's great
[14:10] <Mirek2> what I think would be great is if we had a good browseable collection of ideas
[14:11] <alexanderW> Maybe we could ask one/some dev(s) what they would want a whiteboard to look like
[14:11] <astron> ah wikis arent made with that in mind i guess
[14:11] <Mirek2> I think we need to go the other way around -- propose something first, then see if the developers find it usable or not
[14:12] <Mirek2> we could ask developers to look at some current whiteboards and pick out the elements that suit them and those that don't
[14:12] <Mirek2> I've done something similar myself
[14:12] <Mirek2>
[14:12] <Mirek2> tried to collect items that work for me and items that don't
[14:13] <astron> what do you mean with "doesnt work for you"?
[14:13] <astron> or rather which specific element of those doesnt work fy?
[14:14] <Mirek2> doesn't work for me when a) reading through other's whiteboards, b) collaborating on a whiteboard, c) creating a whiteboard
[14:14] <Mirek2> e.g. take a look at
[14:14] <astron> oh okay.
[14:15] <Mirek2> I don't understand what goals are behind that proposal, I'm not sure how to contribute, don't know what motivated the proposal in the first place
[14:16] <Mirek2> is much better in this respect
[14:16] <Mirek2> but it still has some flaws
[14:16] <astron> it was rough, yeah (when i last looked at it a week ago)
[14:16] <Mirek2> e.g. not sure why there is a thoughts section when thoughts belong on the mailing list
[14:17] <Mirek2> it also has a lot of text, which neither designers nor developers want to waste much time with
[14:18] <astron> right, so, sometimes that lot of text is actually useful in defining what has been thought about so far.
[14:18] <alexanderW> So should we try to improve the most important whiteboards at first and then contact devs?
[14:18] <astron> i absolutely agree, it hurts skimmability  though
[14:19] <Mirek2> I'd like to work together to develop a whiteboard template that is pithy and browseable
[14:19] <Mirek2> we can use as a starting point
[14:19] <alexanderW> sounds good
[14:19] <astron> indeed
[14:20] <Mirek2> take a look and tell me what's missing and what's unnecessary
[14:20] <Mirek2> and what could be handled better
[14:21] <astron> so i guess it should ex. summary (there), status (there), main advantages/disadvantages (not there yet)
[14:21] <alexanderW> So different proposals would be displayed on that page and after deciding on one, the others would be hidden?
[14:22] <astron> by the way, there already is a similar whiteboard
[14:22] <Mirek2> I did mention that
[14:23] <astron> o sorry
[14:23] <astron> well then we should probably improve that with stuff from your sandbox.
[14:24] <Mirek2> I'd link you to an archive page of the mailing list message with my take on the whiteboard, but it seems that the archive is down
[14:24] <Mirek2> it's probably in your mailbox though
[14:25] <Mirek2> I speicifcally avoided "Advantages" vs. "Disadvantages", because those are quite subjective (small icons might be an advantage for one, a disadvantage for another) and should be handled on the mailing list
[14:26] <astron> well whiteboards always take the perspective of its author, no?
[14:26] <Mirek2> a whiteboard should be used just for describing the problem and the solutions, while the mailing list should be for discussing them
[14:26] <Mirek2> @astron: no, I don't think it should
[14:27] <Mirek2> a good whiteboard should be objective, with enough space for anyone's proposals
[14:27] <astron> doesnt lead to more chaos than good?
[14:27] <Mirek2> a whiteboard's goal should be to solve a problem, not to develop a single person's idea
[14:28] <Mirek2> @astron: it's part of working in a community
[14:28] <astron> so, an idea always starts somewhere. and of course it should be developed collaboratively, but we do need some sort fo leadership
[14:28] <Mirek2> but if you look at, the proposals are clearly separated
[14:29] <Mirek2> @astron: basically, all proposals would root from the description of the problem and the scope
[14:29] <Mirek2> all proposals then come from the scope
[14:29] <astron> okay, but the problem is still subjective, then
[14:30] <Mirek2> the Design lead (Christoph Noack, I believe) should take helm when there's a problem to sort out
[14:30] <Mirek2> (i.e. when we can't merge the proposals together)
[14:30] <Mirek2> @astron: Take a look at
[14:31] <Mirek2> The "Requirements" section isn't very biased
[14:32] <astron> how would make that neutral? problems arent objective. and they wont be until UX is a real science
[14:32] <Mirek2> Just points out the needs (based on feature plans and development restraints)
[14:32] <astron> damn didnt read what you said...
[14:33] <astron> but i still think the point remains valid.
[14:33] <Mirek2> it does, but everything always is subjective somehow
[14:34] <Mirek2> the more objective we are, the better
[14:34] <Mirek2> what helps is having a clear vision defined
[14:34] <Mirek2> some sort of HIG
[14:34] <astron> right.
[14:34] <Mirek2> which, incidentally, is another thing I wanted to talk about
[14:34] <astron> great
[14:35] <Mirek2> there's even an early whiteboard for it
[14:35] <Mirek2>
[14:35] <Mirek2> again, it doesn't follow the idea handling template
[14:36] <Mirek2> but before we move on to that topic, I'd like to finish the previous one
[14:36] <astron> okay
[14:36] <Mirek2> can we agree to keep all thoughts and opinions to the mailing list and have whiteboards be referential material?
[14:37] <Mirek2> (i.e. used for describing, not for commenting)
[14:37] <astron> basically ~yes
[14:37] <alexanderW> Yes, that makes sense
[14:37] <Mirek2> Is there anything on that I should change?
[14:39] <alexanderW> I don't think so
[14:39] <astron> i still maintain that (dis) advantages should be immediately glanceable
[14:39] <astron> (if thats a word)
[14:39] <Mirek2> but (dis)advantages seem like part of the discussion
[14:39] <astron> but theyre also the motivation for even starting a proposal
[14:40] <alexanderW> Maybe only the advantages that we can agree on after discussing the topic on the mailing list
[14:40] <Mirek2> that's what the scope is for
[14:41] <Mirek2> but proposals based on a scope will have different advantages and disadvantages themselves
[14:41] <Mirek2> and that's something to handle on the mailing list
[14:43] <Mirek2> or perhaps I'm not understanding what you're saying properly -- could you give me an example?
[14:43] <astron> okay ... maybe then have the different proposal's d/advantages available at a glance...
[14:43] <alexanderW> I think that'd be a good compromise
[14:44] <Mirek2> ok
[14:44] <alexanderW> Then it's obvious that those points are subjective and can be regarded as such
[14:44] <astron> i guess we could use color handling as a test balloon to see if that works
[14:45] <astron> its obviously a pretty hot topic, dev likes it, design likes it and we really need movement there.
[14:45] <alexanderW> Yes. And add some kind of example to the sandbox
[14:45] <Mirek2> adding it right now
[14:45] <astron> nah, i meant modifying the original page.
[14:46] <alexanderW> I meant both
[14:46] <astron> oh
[14:48] <Mirek2> first shot:
[14:49] <alexanderW> ok
[14:49] <astron> that'll set the hurdle for adding a new category pretty high.
[14:49] <Mirek2> what do you mean?
[14:50] <astron> adding a new table row is comparatively hard.
[14:50] <astron> but that wouldnt be a problem if we an exhaustive number of categories
[14:51] <Mirek2> adding a column is harder than adding a row
[14:51] <Mirek2> it makes sense to have proposals as columns
[14:51] <Mirek2> I don't think it's very hard to add a row...
[14:52] <astron> technically, no. (there is a bit of wiki markup necessary) psychologically, it will probably stop you.
[14:53] <astron> (if youre not the maintainer of the whiteboard
[14:53] <astron> )
[14:53] <Mirek2> really?
[14:53] <alexanderW> So should we go with enumerations instead?
[14:53] <Mirek2> I think tables are much easier to look through
[14:54] <Mirek2> long lists can be overwhelming
[14:54] <astron> i would have proposed a simple table advantages|disadvantages below every proposal
[14:54] <astron> yes, long lists can be
[14:55] <Mirek2> but then you don't really have the comparison
[14:55] <Mirek2> some proposals may use different categories than others
[14:55] <Mirek2> and it'd be hard to compare proposals because there just wouldn't be a direct comparison (you'd have to remember the data from all the tables to compare)
[14:57] <astron> maybe some sort of color coding and helpful editing by the person who started the whiteboard woul help
[14:57] <astron> +d
[14:57] <alexanderW> Yeah, someone should take care of having a decent table
[14:57] <Mirek2> what do you mean? have a maintainer for a whiteboard to make sure each proposal is structured in the same way?
[14:58] <astron> yes.
[14:58] <astron> we need some one who is responsible for every whiteboard
[14:58] <astron> who tries to push it, who keeps it in order.
[14:59] <Mirek2> what do you mean -- have one maintainer per whiteboard, or have one maintainer make sure all whiteboards are structured, or both?
[14:59] <Mirek2> (I feel both are necessary.)
[14:59] <astron> one maintainer/whiteboard and mentoring
[15:00] <astron> (of some sort)
[15:00] <Mirek2> what kind of mentoring?
[15:00] <astron> thats where the "of some sort" comes into play, ie idk
[15:00] <alexanderW> A person you can contact if you want to know more about the reasoning, maybe someone who should get in contact with the developers
[15:01] <astron> right, someone who pings people via mail (in a friendly manner)
[15:02] <Mirek2> so a person to guide the whiteboard maintainers? one to make sure that whiteboards are being maintained properly as well as provide a bridge between developers and designers?
[15:03] <astron> kind of, yes
[15:03] <Mirek2> why kind of? what am I missing?
[15:04] <astron> nothing actually.
[15:04] <astron> the problem is that theres no one full-time on design
[15:04] <Mirek2> where on design? you'd like a 24/7 contact?
[15:05] <Mirek2> I think it's enough if the head replies in a day or two...
[15:05] <astron> not 24/7, 9 to 5 would be enough
[15:06] <alexanderW> on IRC? I thought of mail?
[15:06] <Mirek2> so you'd really like for there to be direct responses...
[15:06] <Mirek2> theoretically, if we really wanted this, we could take shifts
[15:06] <Mirek2> but I don't think the demand is there...
[15:07] <astron> hm, what i mean is someone who does this professionally.
[15:07] <Mirek2> (there are only a handful of us on the team)
[15:08] <Mirek2> (and we're all able to follow guidelines and contact the design team/developer team mailing list when there's need)
[15:08] <astron> awk for the mo
[15:08] <alexanderW> afk?
[15:09] <astron> no, not any more (but thats what i meant)
[15:09] <alexanderW> I think it'd be enough to point to the thread and mantion who came up with the original idea
[15:09] <alexanderW> *mention
[15:10] <astron> ahm which thread..? (sry, didn't get that)
[15:10] <astron> the thread for a whiteboard?
[15:10] <alexanderW> mailing list thread
[15:10] <alexanderW> on Nabble
[15:11] <alexanderW> yes
[15:12] <Mirek2> what do you mean?
[15:12] <Mirek2> (getting a bit lost)
[15:12] <astron> too
[15:13] <alexanderW> A link on the whiteboard page linking to the mailing list thread on Nabble plus a mention who originally come up with the idea
[15:14] <astron> to do what?
[15:15] <alexanderW> allow people who are not on the design team to join the discussion. It probably won't be the case very often, but at least there is a contact given
[15:15] <astron> okay, yes
[15:16] <Mirek2> yeah, ok
[15:18] <Mirek2> so, to summarize, we want one template for most if not all of our whiteboards, yes?
[15:18] <alexanderW> yup
[15:18] <astron> definitely
[15:19] <alexanderW> What's up next?
[15:19] <Mirek2> a HIG
[15:19] <Mirek2> though it may be too early to discuss this
[15:19] <astron> id love to have christoph here for that discussion
[15:19] <alexanderW> we might need some more knowledge regarding VCL
[15:20] <alexanderW> yes
[15:20] <alexanderW> IIRC, it can rearrange UI elements based on the platform LO is used on
[15:21] <astron> yes, theres some xml format that almost no dlg uses whichj can do that
[15:21] <Mirek2> yeah, but that's a smaller issue
[15:21] <Mirek2> of course we should always follow the platform's HIG if we can
[15:22] <astron> which begs the question by how much different versions of libo should diverge
[15:22] <Mirek2> what I'd like is some sort of consistency in the LibO UI
[15:22] <alexanderW> I think one of the most important aspects is that we can express the HIG in very few words
[15:22] <Mirek2> for example, we have several ways of sorting commands
[15:22] <alexanderW> What bugs you currently the most?
[15:23] <alexanderW> In Calc?
[15:23] <Mirek2> one for toolbars, one for menus, one for the customize dialog, one for panes, ...
[15:23] <alexanderW> ah, sorting commands
[15:23] <Mirek2> and the categorization is pretty haphazard
[15:23] <alexanderW> not 'sorting commands'
[15:23] <alexanderW> lol
[15:23] <Mirek2> or take a look at the Options dialog
[15:24] <Mirek2> :)
[15:25] <alexanderW> Efforts in the direction of an about:options kinda thing would be very helpful to weed out the mostly unused stuff
[15:25] <astron> what is there to sort?
[15:25] <astron> yes, ill hopefully be able to discuss about:config stuff with tbehrens at the hackfest
[15:26] <alexanderW> great
[15:26] <astron> the good news is that at least it is a gsoc proposal
[15:26] <Mirek2> yeah, hopefully
[15:26] <Mirek2>  there are some decisions that have been made since the inception of LibreOffice that I think made the UI worse
[15:27] <Mirek2> for example, the Title page dialog is pretty unusable
[15:27] <Mirek2> or the new navigation toolbar
[15:27] <astron> havent used the title page dlg very much. navigation toolbar is annoying
[15:28] <astron> (at least preconfigured)
[15:28] <Mirek2> the thing is, few people know what the dialog is actually for
[15:28] <astron> im not objecting to having it in the software (although it is a bit unreliable) – but i cant see much of a point in using it. and most wont be able to either, so it should be hidden by default
[15:29] <astron> most +users
[15:29] <Mirek2> it shouldn't be hidden by default -- if anything, it should be an extension
[15:29] <Mirek2> why bother bundling something with your software if you'll hide it afterwards...
[15:30] <alexanderW> I think that dialog is useful, but it should be moed to 'insert'
[15:30] <alexanderW> *moved
[15:30] <Mirek2> how is it useful?
[15:31] <Mirek2> does it do anything the "Page..." dialog doesn't do?
[15:31] <Mirek2> we already have all the features the dialog has
[15:31] <Mirek2> and they're more usable than the dialog is
[15:32] <astron> right, i think the idea was to make title page creation more task oriented
[15:32] <astron> (not that id know)
[15:32] <Mirek2> plus the dialog has some bugs like allowing you to select to place title pages at pages that don't exist
[15:32] <astron> have you reported that?
[15:32] <Mirek2> and it only covers only a single page style
[15:33] <Mirek2> by that reasoning, we should also have a separate "left-right pages" and "reference page" wizards
[15:33] <Mirek2> which would be perfectly acceptable, but as extensions rather than features
[15:33] <alexanderW> Well, I needed to have some title pages without pagenumbers in the footer and continguing on the second page with "2"
[15:34] <Mirek2> I've read about it somewhere
[15:34] <alexanderW> I'll just try to do so without that dialogue
[15:34] <Mirek2> so I hope the person that wrote about it filed a report
[15:34] <Mirek2> @alexanderW: ok, go ahead
[15:35] <Mirek2> if you find it hard, then that means we need to improve the usability of page styles
[15:35] <Mirek2> not that we need a wizard for everything that could be accomplished with page styles
[15:35] <astron> sure
[15:36] <astron> thats the root cause
[15:36] <astron> we need more emphasis on usign styles
[15:37] <astron> and better styles creation obviously
[15:37] <Mirek2> yes, but not at the detriment of hard coding
[15:37] <Mirek2> (I keep hearing that we should hide the bold and italic icons, for example, which would just be detrimental)
[15:38] <Mirek2> Google Docs does it quite well
[15:38] <Mirek2>
[15:39] <alexanderW> Seems to work well
[15:39] <Mirek2> it does, really well
[15:39] <alexanderW> We need to make those styles more prominent
[15:40] <Mirek2> one of the things I suggested was to have one drop-down for paragraph styles, one for character styles
[15:40] <Mirek2> since both have different use cases
[15:40] <Mirek2> it would also help narrow down the list of styles
[15:40] <alexanderW> Which ones ore the mos
[15:40] <alexanderW> t used ones?
[15:40] <Mirek2> paragraph styles
[15:41] <alexanderW> yes and then?
[15:41] <Mirek2> character styles aren't very common
[15:41] <alexanderW> I think page styles would be more useful than character styles
[15:41] <astron> i wouldnt say that
[15:41] <Mirek2> then page styles, I assume
[15:41] <Mirek2> I think so
[15:41] <alexanderW>  Plus, having previews like in Google docs would be a big advantage
[15:41] <astron> agree
[15:41] <Mirek2> most of what you can do with character styles is easily done with hard coding
[15:41] <Mirek2> agree
[15:42] <astron> sure, but with character styles you can convey meaning
[15:42] <Mirek2> as for making styles prominent, I suggested having colored buttons:
[15:43] <Mirek2> Google does the same thing to emphasize buttons
[15:43] <Mirek2> Gnome will too
[15:43] <astron> gnome, though is currently in some sort of exploration phase
[15:43] <Mirek2> @astron -- I'm not saying that character styles aren't useful, just that they're not used as frequently
[15:44] <Mirek2> @astron: not at all, they've got their principles nailed down
[15:44] <astron> we could add "strong" and "emphasis" buttons in place of the bold/italc buttons :)
[15:44] <astron> shell is quite usable, but documents and web arent
[15:45] <astron> (at least not using a mouse
[15:45] <astron> )
[15:45] <Mirek2> they have them designed, just need to develop them
[15:45] <Mirek2> web will get a completely tabless design
[15:45] <Mirek2> which will work similarly to how shell works
[15:46] <Mirek2> have an overview accessible with a keyboard shortcut or a button click
[15:46] <alexanderW> Yes, haing very few character styles presented like 'bold' or 'italic' would make sense
[15:46] <Mirek2> bold and italic aren't styles
[15:46] <alexanderW> I know
[15:47] <Mirek2> using strong and emphasis would  be counter-productive
[15:47] <alexanderW> but they would work the same way, or not?
[15:47] <astron> i know it woudl be counterproductive
[15:47] <Mirek2> well, they'd be styles
[15:47] <astron> incidentally, though, that's what happened when html4 replaced html3.2
[15:47] <Mirek2> but we want users to use styles as labels, basically
[15:47] <alexanderW> I meant some thing like maybe 'quote' or something similar
[15:48] <Mirek2> we already have some styles like that
[15:48] <alexanderW> yes, I know
[15:48] <astron> in the list, yes. but a quotes button would be new
[15:48] <Mirek2> one idea I had was to have a sepearate floating bar for styles:
[15:49] <alexanderW> But there are so many character styles, I doubt many look through the whole list but apply something similar manually
[15:49] <Mirek2> with the buttons using 1-3-characters
[15:49] <Mirek2> this bar would only be for "pinned" (or favorited, or whatever) styles
[15:50] <alexanderW> paragraph, character or both?
[15:50] <Mirek2> both
[15:51] <Mirek2> we really need to clean up the bundled styles, though
[15:51] <astron> absolutely
[15:51] <alexanderW> indeed
[15:51] <Mirek2> perhaps just have styles for headings and make it really easy to create custom styles
[15:51] <astron> headings are paragraphs
[15:52] <astron> (styles)
[15:52] <Mirek2> yes
[15:52] <alexanderW> I think at least one good style should be bundled
[15:52] <astron> we don't even need all the heading styles, anything bevyond third outline level is bad anyway
[15:53] <Mirek2> as I said -- heading styles should be bundled, since they're used quite frequently and since they can be used to generate a table of contents
[15:53] <alexanderW> maybe we could cooperate with the guys making efforts to deliver good LibreOffice defaults with Ubuntu 12.10
[15:53] <Mirek2> @astron: I'd handle it this way -- have 10 heading levels, but only show the ones that have already been used in the document + 1 level further
[15:53] <astron> oh btw cool that you startew a wiki page for that
[15:54] <astron> -w+d
[15:54] <Mirek2> (e.g. with a new document, you'd only see "Heading 1", once you applied that, you'd have both "Heading 1" and "Heading 2", once you applied "H2", you'd have "H3" and so on)
[15:54] <alexanderW> No problem
[15:55] <alexanderW> Could this cause confusion?
[15:55] <Mirek2> which wiki page?
[15:55] <alexanderW>
[15:56] <Mirek2> I don't understand why a person would need to use "Heading 2" if he hasn't used "Heading 1"...
[15:56] <Mirek2> the whole point of "Heading 2" is to denote a subcategory within a "Heading 1" category
[15:56] <alexanderW> Sure
[15:57] <alexanderW> Makes sense
[15:57] <alexanderW> I was just wondering whether this would reduce or increase confusion if those additional options pop up
[15:57] <astron> whch options?
[15:57] <astron> +i
[15:58] <astron> dang it spelling
[15:58] <Mirek2> You mean if "Heading 2" appeared once I used "Heading 1"?
[15:58] <alexanderW> additional styles
[15:58] <Mirek2> by "options"
[15:58] <alexanderW> yes
[15:58] <astron> okay.
[15:58] <Mirek2> I don't think it's too confusing
[15:59] <alexanderW> probably not
[15:59] <Mirek2> applications have had contextual features for a long time -- Office has contextual tabs, LibreOffice has contextual toolbars, Gnome Shell has contextual workspaces, ...
[15:59] <astron> don't think it's so confusing
[16:00] <astron> still, we should at least limit it to 5 heading styles, because we want user to create good documents, not endlessly complicated ones
[16:00] <Mirek2> btw, why "Ubuntu Templates"? Why can't we just work on application templates regardless of OS?
[16:00] <astron> ubuntu want to hold some kind of template contest
[16:01] <alexanderW> They will later replace the current templates in LibreOffice
[16:01] <astron>
[16:02] <astron> sorry, you've been out of the discussion
[16:02] <astron> (so far)
[16:03] <Mirek2> ok, so it's not Ubuntu-only, then?
[16:03] <Mirek2> why the Ubuntu label?
[16:03] <astron> not really
[16:03] <astron> i think they will even abstain from usign the ubuntu font
[16:04] <astron> (which we dont ship upstream)
[16:06] <astron> ubuntu want to ship it first
[16:06] <astron> and ubuntu want their users to contribute
[16:06] <astron> similar to their wallpaper contests i think
[16:07] == Mirek2 [d5dcf47d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
[16:08] <alexanderW> whoopsie
[16:08] <astron> was that an accident..?
[16:08] == Mirek2 [d5dcf47d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #libreoffice-design
[16:08] <alexanderW> ah
[16:08] <Mirek2> not sure what happened just now -- Firefox seems to have frozen up on me
[16:09] <astron> okay
[16:09] <Mirek2> what have I missed?
[16:09] <alexanderW> nothing
[16:09] <astron> so what did last see?
[16:09] <Mirek2> the last message I could read is: "(so far)"
[16:10] <astron> [16:03] <Mirek2> ok, so it's not Ubuntu-only, then? [16:03] <Mirek2> why the Ubuntu label? [16:03] <astron> not really [16:03] <astron> i think they will even abstain from usign the ubuntu font [16:04] <astron> (which we dont ship upstream) [16:06] <astron> ubuntu want to ship it first [16:06] <astron> and ubuntu want their users to contribute [16:06] <astron> similar to their wallpaper contests i think
[16:10] <Mirek2> as for the open questions:
[16:11] <Mirek2> would it be possible to have templates with both a 4:3 and a widescreen variant?
[16:11] <alexanderW> thats another issue I've been thinking about for quite some time
[16:11] <Mirek2> not sure I understand the necessary templates part -- wouldn't it be best to just ship with nice generic templates?
[16:12] <Mirek2> the source drawings should definitely be uploaded too
[16:12] <alexanderW> Currently, you can only set slideshow page sizes using either DIN or whatever standards or defined sizes in cm
[16:12] <astron> we will need to coordinate to create a list of requirements
[16:13] <astron> and i think there will be lots of things that will need to be improved in the templates later on.
[16:13] <alexanderW> it would be nice if we one could select an aspect ratio, too. Currently, I need to detect my screen size using 'xrandr' and enter the correct data into the 'page' dialogue
[16:14] <Mirek2> yeah
[16:14] <Mirek2> btw, the Template and Extensions website needs some fixing up too
[16:14] <astron> one of those is l10n which also includes paper sizes
[16:14] <astron> @mirek2 oh it does
[16:15] <astron> it so does
[16:15] <alexanderW> If one could select the aspect ratio, all a template designer would need to do is provide background images with a rather high resolution
[16:15] <astron> cool idea
[16:15] <Mirek2> right
[16:15] <Mirek2> how do master pages work in LibreOffice, btw?
[16:16] <alexanderW> You can rearrange the basic elements
[16:16] <astron> view > master > slide master
[16:16] <astron> (if thats what you mean
[16:16] <astron> )
[16:16] <alexanderW> you can move the text boxes and define how text looks like
[16:16] <astron> but if you mean how they relate to styles, it seems a bit entangeld
[16:17] <astron> -el+le
[16:18] <alexanderW> I think editing the sample text in a master page means editing the paragraph style, right?
[16:19] <Mirek2> having just checked out master pages in LibreOffice, I have to say I'm utterly confused...
[16:19] <alexanderW> ouch
[16:19] <astron> @alex: yes
[16:21] <Mirek2> how exactly do you make a slide use the second slide from the master slide page?
[16:21] <astron> fun fact: yesterday night i had to fix up a presentation (deadline looming) and needed to insert a title slide with a different master ... i didn't find out how to do that [i ended up covering the whole slide with a white rectangle and started from scratch on top of that]
[16:21] <alexanderW> simply click on that second master slide
[16:21] <Mirek2> nevermind, I found it -- it's the slide design button
[16:22] <alexanderW> Yes, or that pane on the right
[16:22] <Mirek2> I always hide the pane -- doesn't work with my netbook
[16:22] <astron> still, how do i make that it is applied for a single slide only?
[16:22] <Mirek2> the slide design button works that way
[16:23] <alexanderW> There's a button in the toolbar that lets you select a master slide to be applied to the current slide
[16:23] <astron> oh
[16:23] <alexanderW> apparently, that's not too obvious :/
[16:24] <astron> yes
[16:24] <astron> although the side pane has a context menu too, i just saw
[16:25] <astron> ouch
[16:25] <Mirek2> ouch
[16:25] <Mirek2> the problem is that there are about 4 buttons concerning slide design
[16:27] <alexanderW> I think the ones showing the styles could be dropped
[16:27] <Mirek2> which one?
[16:27] <alexanderW> And the same goes for the one allowing to add a page with a specific layout
[16:27] <alexanderW> the nine squares
[16:27] <alexanderW> with the hand
[16:28] <astron> oh those squares represent selector buttons which represent styles
[16:29] <alexanderW> ah!
[16:29] <astron> in the industrial icon its still quite visible that those are buttons
[16:29] <Mirek2> what use cases are there for the styles?
[16:30] <alexanderW> Basically none
[16:30] <astron> soemtimes you cant edit somethign usign the master page
[16:30] <alexanderW> at least when I use Impress
[16:30] <astron> (i think)
[16:30] <alexanderW> what exactly?
[16:31] <astron> Subtitle seems to not be present on the master (i think)
[16:32] <astron> but do enlighten me if it is – im not using impress too often
[16:33] <Mirek2> me neither, to be honest; I use Google Docs when I can :/
[16:33] <astron> traitor ;)
[16:34] <alexanderW> It only seems to be used when one applies the title page layout
[16:34] <astron> ah okay
[16:35] <Mirek2> :)
[16:35] <alexanderW> I don't know whether it's an issue, but one cannot link a certain master page to a certain layout
[16:35] <alexanderW> I had issues wrappin my mind around this when I started doing templates
[16:36] <Mirek2> It seems like we all agree that Impress has a lot of UI issues -- how do you propose we tackle them?
[16:37] <astron> impress also has undo/redo issues. and crashing issues.
[16:37] <alexanderW> Maybe first create a list on the whiteboard overview page
[16:37] <Mirek2> I'd hold off on creating a whiteboard before we define the issues we want to work on
[16:38] <Mirek2> we could do that here now or on the mailing list
[16:38] <alexanderW> I didn't meant to create those whiteboards already, but just list the issues
[16:38] <astron> currently, i think there are enough whiteboards in need of some tlc, so i dont think its too productive to start ten new ones on impress
[16:39] <Mirek2> I agree
[16:39] <Mirek2> how should we go about approving and implementing the new Whiteboard template?
[16:40] <Mirek2> Have a rich discussion on the mailing list followed by a vote?
[16:40] <alexanderW> yes
[16:40] <Mirek2> Then tweak the existing whiteboards to use the same structure?
[16:40] <alexanderW> and then people can voluteer to apply the template
[16:40] <astron> okay
[16:41] <Mirek2> ok
[16:41] <astron> before we wrap this up, does anyone else plan to be at the hackfest?
[16:42] <Mirek2> now that we've had a discussion about Impress, it seems like we should do something about it
[16:42] <Mirek2> not me
[16:42] <alexanderW> Sorry, no
[16:42] <astron> okay
[16:42] <Mirek2> you?
[16:42] <astron> yes.
[16:43] <Mirek2> who wants to put this discussion up on the wiki?
[16:43] <astron> ill do.
(Some off-topic parts removed. – Astron)
[16:49] <alexanderW> So, are we done for today?
[16:49] <Mirek2> yeah, I think so
[16:49] <astron> i guess we are.
[16:50] <astron> okay, then, see you next week?
[16:50] <Mirek2> yes
[16:50] <alexanderW> Alright
[16:50] <Mirek2> have you both answered the Doodle poll?
[16:50] <alexanderW> ah, not yet
[16:50] <astron> i havent so far..
[16:50] <alexanderW> will do so later
[16:50] <Mirek2> :D funny that you both cam
[16:50] <Mirek2> came
[16:51] <astron> stroke of luck
[16:51] <alexanderW> probably
[16:51] <astron> well, bye
[16:51] <alexanderW> Have a great evening, guys
[16:51] <alexanderW> bye
[16:51] <Mirek2> you too
[16:51] <Mirek2> bye