Design/Meetings/2012-06-10

TDF LibreOffice Document Liberation Project Community Blogs Weblate Nextcloud Redmine Ask LibreOffice Donate
Date/Time: 2012-06-10, 1600 UTC (the time below is 2 hours ahead of UTC)
Location: IRC, channel #libreoffice-design
Attendees

Log

18:00:38 astron247: Hello.
18:00:46 alexanderW: Hi
18:02:27 mirek2: hi
18:03:04 mirek2: (I feel a bit sick today, so excuse me if I'm a bit slower than usual.)
18:03:10 alexanderW: Could you quickly check whether you have problems with the BrightBlue masterpage: http://ubuntuone.com/1rcQiE2v1xbJ0lWsIqWWzu
18:03:37 alexanderW: Bjoern said he had problems applying the masterpage, but I don't
18:04:34 astron247: no problems in 3.5
18:04:43 astron247: but ... do we ship URW Gothic?
18:04:52 mirek2: blueprint plans uses dejavu fonts
18:05:23 astron247: alex asked us to open _bright_blue
18:05:25 mirek2: and there are other font problems as well
18:05:45 mirek2: right
18:06:05 alexanderW: oh, they are only ubuntu default fonts, not ones shipped with LibO?
18:06:11 mirek2: right
18:06:13 astron247: ah, i thought you were correcting me...
18:06:51 mirek2: when is the deadline for template submission?
18:07:11 astron247: beta 2 time?
18:07:20 mirek2: which is?
18:07:25 astron247: ugh... 
18:07:31 alexanderW: Jun 18 - Jun 24
18:07:48 astron247: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/3.6
18:08:15 mirek2: so June 18?
18:09:05 mirek2: the problem with the current selection of templates is that some take up quite a lot of space
18:09:39 alexanderW: Well, if I include the svg, some don't render properly
18:10:11 alexanderW: and at least one SVG is much bigger since it contains several bitmaps
18:10:26 mirek2: would it be possible to not include the bitmaps?
18:10:38 mirek2: have some simpler templates?
18:11:28 alexanderW: Well, they are neccesary for the vintage temlate e.g.
18:11:30 astron247: thats what michael said btw
18:12:00 mirek2: anyway, what I wanted to say was that http://spiceofdesign.deviantart.com/#/d52vby2 presents some simple designs that we could use instead
18:12:17 mirek2: and have the more space-intensive templates presented online instead
18:12:48 mirek2: I got in contact with the author -- he'd like to help, but has trouble with LibreOffice's theming system
18:13:15 astron247: @mirek: these templates are heavily font-based
18:13:36 mirek2: basically all of the submitted templates are
18:13:38 astron247: we'd still need a bigger selection of fonts
18:13:53 mirek2: but these templates would work with the Liberation fonts as well
18:14:15 mirek2: we can't have a bigger selection of fonts
18:14:34 mirek2: even if these fonts were bundled with LibreOffice, we couldn't ensure compatibility with MS Office
18:14:45 mirek2: which is a big issue for us right now
18:15:00 mirek2: however, the templates still work well, even with Liberation fonts
18:15:12 mirek2: and they'd be quite light
18:15:24 astron247: im not sure about how well theyd work ... honestly.
18:15:25 alexanderW: We now got fewer masterpages than before, so maybe we can work on that for 3.7?
18:15:30 alexanderW: 14 instead of 25 I think
18:16:00 alexanderW: and those presentation templates with a several masterpages included were removed
18:16:22 mirek2: yes, but do we need that many masterpages anyway?
18:16:28 alexanderW: I doubt it
18:16:33 mirek2: especially now that we have an online repository
18:17:12 astron247: it's not integrated all that well so far, but youre right we should aim for a rather minimal selection
18:17:16 alexanderW: Yes, templates for Writer, Impress calc etc will probably not be included anyway
18:17:29 alexanderW: rather be downloadable
18:18:16 mirek2: In any case, it's preferable that the bundled designs are scalable and lightweight
18:19:00 astron247: @alex: can you recreate the bitmap parts within impress somehow?
18:19:01 mirek2: also, vector-based designs are more generic and less distracting (i.e. they bring the content forward)
18:20:00 alexanderW: I used them mainly to bring in paper textures, in order to make them less dull
18:20:12 alexanderW: vintage and cuba libre only, IIRC
18:20:40 mirek2: to be honest, I would prefer them without the bitmap parts
18:21:20 mirek2: especially as the template's background shouldn't bring attention to itself, but rather to the content presented on it
18:21:46 astron247: @alex: where are vintage and cuba libre? they don't seem to be in the package you linked to...
18:22:14 mirek2: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Call_for_Templates ?
18:22:31 alexanderW: http://ubuntuone.com/3dhPGPbyYnvvkAjZR8Ffoe
18:24:07 nrundy: im just an everyday user. if anyone needs perspective of joe schmoe, let me know
18:24:13 astron247: seems i havent looked at that call for templates for quite a while
18:24:40 astron247: @nick: youre invited to take a look at our templates.
18:24:53 nrundy: yes, im looking
18:26:16 mirek2: so... should we judge the current templates now or next week?
18:26:33 mirek2: given that the deadline is the 18th, perhaps we could next week
18:26:55 astron247: okay... i dont really want to judge either cuba libre or vintage... i would never make a presentation with them i think (even though they might be very attractive to others)
18:28:03 alexanderW: okay
18:28:45 astron247: but, tbh, i almost always start from scratch with presentations
18:29:17 mirek2_: @astron: to be honest, neither would I, as I really prefer the most minimalistic of templates
18:29:41 mirek2_: since, as I said, those bring out the content and are relevant no matter the topic
18:30:02 mirek2_: anyway, this week, it'd be great if we could a) change the fonts in the proposals to Liberation fonts and see how they look, ...
18:30:30 mirek2_: ... b) see whether we need some kind of license statement and ask the authors for it
18:30:52 nrundy: Liberation Fonts look terrible in Word. Is there anything that can improve this?
18:31:05 nrundy: or is it just a matter of Word users having Lib font in their Word?
18:31:17 nrundy: Most people I deal with use Word
18:31:58 astron247: @nick: google made some improvements to liberation and if were lucky the improved fonts will already be in 3.6
18:32:18 mirek2_: ... c) see whether we might not be able to cut down on the size of some templates
18:33:19 astron247: so, vintage seems not so hard to cut down: make the bookmark a vector image, the ink spot too and use ~solid background
18:34:03 astron247: you'd lose quite a bit of texture though
18:35:12 mirek2_: would that look bad?
18:35:43 mirek2_: if so, could we just keep vintage online and have a simpler vector-based template shipped with LibO instead?
18:38:13 astron247: mirek: right now, i think the background looks a bit blurry... so maybe its not so bad...
18:38:46 astron247: somehow, the financial times keeps their brand image alive just by using light-pink backgrounds ...
18:39:05 alexanderW: What about the other ones?
18:42:57 astron247: okay... so what was your question alex?
18:43:19 alexanderW: Whether to use vector images for the other templates
18:43:28 mirek2: yes, please
18:44:47 astron247: to the extent possible with our svg renderer, but no further than that
18:45:02 alexanderW: ok
18:45:21 alexanderW: Shall we go on?
18:45:27 mirek2: yes
18:46:06 mirek2: would you like to talk about design principles?
18:46:38 astron247: id like to get something else out of the way before we go into that
18:46:47 mirek2: sure, go ahead
18:46:50 astron247: how do we vote on the splash screen issue?
18:47:12 mirek2: I feel that's closely related to the design principles issue
18:47:29 mirek2: if they are passed, we'd try them against these principles to see how they stack up
18:47:29 astron247: nah, i meant the technical process of voting...
18:47:54 mirek2: we'd eliminate any that wouldn't follow them
18:48:16 astron247: which would be all ... since splashes are inherently ~useless?
18:48:27 alexanderW: voting on the remaining ones on the mailing list?
18:48:36 mirek2: I guess so
18:48:55 mirek2: @astron: well, they are useful to indicate that an application is loading if it's taking a long time
18:48:57 alexanderW: Is there an aim what startup times we want before removing the spash screen?
18:49:13 mirek2: I don't think there is right now
18:49:16 astron247: none that id know of
18:49:26 mirek2: but we do want to get rid of it sometime in the future
18:49:31 astron247: i hope the devs arent too infatuated with the poor thing
18:49:46 mirek2: :)
18:50:03 astron247: tbh, at least on my notebook, libo starts faster than firefox...
18:50:08 astron247: or thunderbird
18:50:15 astron247: neither of which have a splash
18:50:22 mirek2: :)
18:50:36 astron247: (although there are addons for that)
18:50:45 mirek2: that may be it
18:51:17 astron247: you mean, so. should code an addon that enables the splash?
18:51:49 mirek2: about the voting: how about voting on both the mailing list and the G+ page, so that we have a broader opinion?
18:53:05 mirek2: @astron: would anyone install that willingly?
18:53:09 astron247: maybe ... and then, discuss any outstanding issues with the top ~2 in the chat later on?
18:53:20 alexanderW: yes
18:53:25 nrundy: can the splash be disabled, like as an option in preferences?
18:53:36 mirek2: I would discuss the issues first, then vote on them
18:53:36 astron247: yes, what os are you on?
18:53:41 astron247: (@nick)
18:53:49 nrundy: ubuntu
18:54:17 astron247: gksu gedit /etc/libreoffice/sofficerc
18:55:02 astron247: change the line that says Logo=1 to Logo=0
18:55:35 nrundy: Thanks! I have SSD so splash is pretty much useless
18:56:23 astron247: no problem
18:56:41 astron247: okay, so mirek, when would you discuss the proposals?
18:56:57 mirek2: I guess this week would be a good time
18:57:13 mirek2: but, again, I'd like to get our design principles passed
18:57:19 astron247: okay...
18:57:40 mirek2: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Ethos
18:57:58 astron247: im sorry, ill have to go grab dinner ... be back later
18:58:08 mirek2: ok
18:58:14 alexanderW: see you
18:58:35 nrundy: bye i mean
18:59:28 mirek2: any issues with the principles on the wiki?
18:59:49 mirek2: (I'll run them by astron later)
19:00:01 alexanderW: Can we simply copy those of Mozilla? Licensing wise I mean?
19:00:58 mirek2:  I'm sure we can; I can ask permission if we need it, otherwise we can simply link to Mozilla's page of principles
19:01:32 alexanderW: A statement would be useful I think. Otherwise they seem very precise
19:01:39 mirek2: ok
19:01:57 alexanderW: Maybe make the headlines more readable
19:02:16 mirek2: these names are useful for submitting bug reports
19:03:17 alexanderW: I see
19:03:19 mirek2: I don't think it's an issue, but I wouldn't be squarely against simpler names
19:03:38 mirek2: one other topic I wanted to discuss
19:03:51 mirek2: I'd like to get rid of Contests
19:04:35 mirek2: I believe the only current Contest (templates) would be better off as a Playground, as we can always use new templates
19:04:44 alexanderW: But not the option to let the community supply designs?
19:04:55 alexanderW: okay
19:05:11 alexanderW: merge both
19:05:31 mirek2: If we need to pick several designs by a certain date, we should use Whiteboards
19:05:41 mirek2: the workflow of contests was never really well thought-out
19:06:25 mirek2: we would still need to do proposal analysis and tweaking with contests, so we'd wind up with the same workflow as whiteboards
19:07:31 alexanderW: I don't think we need several designs that often, so removing unneccesary and possibly confusing wiki pages could be good
19:07:36 mirek2: ideally, Playgrounds should be the brainstorm space, Whiteboards the refining/working space
19:07:41 alexanderW: especially for new contributors
19:07:43 mirek2: @alex: great
19:08:31 mirek2: is there anything else we need to discuss?
19:09:37 alexanderW: I'm not sure
19:09:54 alexanderW: I think not
19:09:59 mirek2: alright
19:10:16 mirek2: will, nick, any questions/comments/concerns?
19:10:20 alexanderW: Did you complete the icon spreadsheet?
19:11:15 mirek2: only filled it with authors, though some authors weren't mentioned on the log
19:12:02 mirek2: I know Astron already sent an e-mail asking for permission
19:12:16 mirek2: Lapo is the only one we've heard from so far, though
19:12:17 alexanderW: Yes he mentioned that last week
19:12:30 willubuntu: Well, I'm back
19:12:31 alexanderW: hm
19:13:01 willubuntu: So will the splash screen and start center be shipped with LibO 3.6?
19:13:10 alexanderW: no
19:13:24 alexanderW: I think not
19:13:45 mirek2: a new splash screen will ship with LibO, but we haven't decided which one yet
19:13:56 mirek2: a new Start Center as well
19:13:58 alexanderW: today is the last day of feature freeze and if that involves coding it would be too late I think
19:14:07 alexanderW: in 3.6 ?
19:14:18 mirek2: it doesn't involve coding, just simple image replacement
19:14:21 mirek2: yes
19:14:31 alexanderW: oh, nice
19:14:43 mirek2: i.e. it's not a complex issue, and it doesn't really need to be checked for bugs
19:15:25 willubuntu: mirek2: Excepted for the start center, the image is divided into several parts. I've got a problem with it.
19:15:26 willubuntu: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Keep_It_Simple_start_center_screenshot.png
19:15:40 willubuntu: The items are misplaced.
19:16:16 willubuntu: I don't know why initial devs have divided the start center background in several parts. Make no sense
19:16:23 mirek2: that's odd -- replacing the image files should do nothing with the buttons on the start center
19:17:20 alexanderW: Maybe in order to scale it?
19:17:24 willubuntu: I tried to have a look at the code, but didn't found the location of it.
19:17:25 mirek2: your proposal would be possible to carry out, but the look of the buttons on hover and pushed in would probably look odd
19:17:54 willubuntu: alexanderW: Tried with several environments and the background seems to be not scaled at all.
19:18:25 mirek2: maybe with languages that require different widths?
19:18:26 alexanderW: then it's indeed strange
19:18:50 mirek2: (I don't think that's really the case, though)
19:19:15 willubuntu: mirek2: Tried with English, German, and Dutch. I will try with a right-to-left language to see.
19:19:48 willubuntu: I asked the question yesterday on the dev IRC chan, but got no answers (Gsoc mentoring+holiday+wheather)
19:19:58 mirek2: it's funny -- there were special png's for rtl languages, but they were identical to ltr ones
19:20:08 willubuntu: mirek2: Same reflexion
19:20:12 willubuntu: :)
19:20:23 willubuntu: I think they could be removed.
19:20:26 alexanderW: perhaps some sort of legacy
19:20:35 mirek2: that's something that won't be done for 3.6, though
19:21:49 willubuntu: If someone found the problem in the code, please keep me informed.
19:22:07 alexanderW: Rafael posted some screenshots of his work btw: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/attachment/3987922/2/td3.png
19:22:19 willubuntu: alexanderW: in the case of legacy, it would be nicer to update the code.
19:22:45 mirek2: @alex: nice
19:23:03 mirek2: @will: I noticed that your template resembled that on http://mirek2.deviantart.com/#/d4qwtkj
19:23:12 mirek2: did you ask the author for permission?
19:23:19 alexanderW: who?
19:23:31 mirek2: will
19:24:41 willubuntu: I asked the Google+ LibO Design maintainer. He said me I can get inspired by one of these if needed
19:24:59 mirek2: yes, inspired
19:25:15 mirek2: not copy one
19:25:45 mirek2: it's still the IP of Caleb Riley, so you need to ask him for permission
19:25:53 mirek2: to license it under the CC0 license
19:25:58 mirek2: otherwise, we won't be able to include it
19:26:46 mirek2: so... please do ask
19:27:21 mirek2: also, could you change the fonts to Liberation fonts?
19:27:54 willubuntu: mirek2: Why DejaVu fonts are already shipped with LibO, aren't they?
19:28:00 mirek2: nope
19:28:16 mirek2: at least I don't think so
19:28:24 willubuntu: mirek2: On Windows it does
19:28:40 willubuntu: I'll try on my Debian VM
19:28:55 mirek2: are you sure those fonts aren't bundled with some other FOSS app, like Inkscape?
19:29:21 willubuntu: Inkscape seems to be bundled with any fonts.
19:29:23 willubuntu: I'll check
19:29:48 mirek2: even if they were, the developer community wants the templates to use Liberation fonts, as these have the same metrics as Times/Arial/Courier, thereby making them "compatible" for Windows+MS Office users
19:29:59 mirek2: and Mac users as well
19:31:29 willubuntu: mirek2: Ok I'll make the needed modifications.
19:32:18 willubuntu: It's really constraining.
19:32:30 willubuntu: Too much rules, even when it's working well.
19:33:16mirek2: I agree, but it's been decided this way
19:33:36 mirek2: makes me sad that LibreOffice can't take advantage of typography
19:34:01 alexanderW: hopefully that will change if it allows font embedding
19:34:18 mirek2: and be sure to contact Caleb Riley (or should I?) -- otherwise, we won't ship it
19:35:11 mirek2: @alex: maybe, though that will significantly increase filesize...
19:35:45 mirek2: the best solution, IMHO, would be to automatically search FLOSS font repositories for the fonts in a document
19:37:13 mirek2: but that wouldn't satisfy Office users, which, unfortunately, we feel we need to cater to in this respect to our own detriment...
19:37:17 willubuntu: mirek2: I hoped you were joking with this copyright infringement. But not . Yes, please contact him, so.
19:37:39 astron247: ok ... im back
19:37:42 mirek2: @will: no, this really is serious
19:37:51 astron247: so... yes, deja vu should come bundled
19:38:15 mirek2: Apple and MS have sued/bullied a lot of money for lesser things
19:38:47 alexanderW: https://opengrok.libreoffice.org/search?q=urw+gothic&project=core
19:38:52 mirek2: @astron: even if it came bundled, it has different metrics than Times/Arial/Courier, so it couldn't be used for the default templates
19:39:03 alexanderW: ^ Does that mean that URW Gotic is bundled as well?
19:39:29 astron247: not necessarily i think
19:39:44 astron247: since we dont seem to ship with, say, astron boy...
19:39:50 willubuntu: alexanderW: Yes it's shipped with
19:40:01 willubuntu: I just made a fresh install and it is
19:40:25 alexanderW: good
19:40:29 willubuntu: So URW Gothic L and DejaVu are bundled with LibO
19:41:33 mirek2: yes, but it still can't be used with templates, as outlined above
19:42:54 astron247: @mirek: if we reduce typography to the liberation fonts we are pretty much destined to fail.
19:43:13 astron247: anyway, i finally found where fonts lay
19:43:28 mirek2: I'm basing what I say on the last ESC call
19:43:28 astron247: theyre in /more_fonts
19:43:36 willubuntu: mirek2: Finally, could you take over this copyright problem and contact Caleb?
19:43:44 mirek2: @will: will do
19:44:48 astron247: i know i shouldnt argue against you, but against the people that hold that "just-liberation" opinion but...
19:45:12 astron247: ms didnt ask us when they introduced 6 largely great new default fonts
19:45:35 mirek2: I agree with you 100%
19:45:47 willubuntu: mirek2: Is the default font choice for template definitive or can we have a discussion with devs?
19:45:50 willubuntu: +1 astron247
19:45:55 mirek2: that's why I also think integration with font repositories would be much better than bundling fonts with files
19:46:15 astron247: though, font repos require you to be online
19:46:17 mirek2: @will: I think it's definitive, though you can always try
19:46:50 mirek2: @astron: when you receive a file from someone, it usually comes from the Internet
19:47:10 astron247: not if its on a usb key
19:47:13 mirek2: we should, of course, ship the fonts in the bundled templates
19:48:04 astron247: so, ftr, the fonts we ship with:
* opensymbol
* ttf_amt (whatever those are)
* deja vu
* gentium
*liberation
* libertine
19:49:10 astron247: no, amt are the agfa monotype fonts that shipped with staroffice and these are propiretary, so we dont have them
19:49:35 astron247: (i think)
19:50:29 mirek2: I meant that the templates we ship should still use bundled fonts and not rely on these online repositories
19:50:40 astron247: right
19:50:54 mirek2: and we should have a "bundle fonts" option, of course
19:51:16 astron247: on the topic of bundling fonts, i saw there was an AI and eilidhs name .. is there any action in that diraction?
19:51:37 astron247: [in the meeting notes]
19:51:51 mirek2: it's being worked on...
19:52:01 astron247: nice
19:52:24astron247: is this part of odf already?
19:53:10astron247: (or some tdf-internal proposal?)
19:53:22 mirek2: I'm not sure
19:53:32 astron247: okay.
19:53:45 alexanderW: From ask.libreoffice.org: No. The ODF file specification does not support font embedding. And LibreOffice does not embed fonts in file formats that do support font embedding (such as MS formats)
19:54:03 astron247: who posted that?
19:54:06 alexanderW: oh wait
19:54:12 astron247: someone reputable?
19:54:12 alexanderW: 'Pedro'
19:54:16 alexanderW: http://ask.libreoffice.org/question/648/is-it-possible-to-embed-fonts-in-a
19:54:30 astron247: hm, no pedro is mostly a user, i think
19:54:47 astron247: not a core developer
19:54:51 alexanderW: Dag Wieers said yes, ODF would support it
19:54:52 alexanderW: hm
19:56:36 mirek2: alright, can we move on?
19:56:39 astron247: right.
19:57:28 mirek2: while you were gone, we were discussing getting rid of Contests...
19:57:57 mirek2: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Meetings/2012-06-10
19:58:03 astron247: well theyve only been there for a very short while, so i wont miss them much
19:58:15 mirek2: good
19:58:22 astron247: (and thanks, but i kept empathy open)
19:58:30 mirek2: and what about Mozilla's design principles?
19:58:47 mirek2: great -- you can fill in the beginning
19:59:18 astron247: so, as other people (faaborg even) said, all of the principles are irrefutable, so we should pick maybe three that seem most important to us
19:59:29 astron247: (but other than that, i like them.)
19:59:49 mirek2: why? we need as much guidance as possible
20:00:29 astron247: uhm ... i dont think i understand... what do you mean?
20:00:40 mirek2: I think all of them are important for guiding a design, and we should always keep all of them in mind when designing
20:01:08 astron247: but sometimes they go against each other...
20:01:30 astron247: sure, you can keep all in mind, but when theres a conflict where do you go?
20:01:48 mirek2: it may seem that way, and I know Alex said so himself, but I don't think they realy do
20:02:24 mirek2: e.g. it's been said that minimalism counters discovery
20:02:34 astron247: and control
20:02:44 nrundy: i don't know about that
20:02:59 nrundy: Unity in ubuntu is pretty minimal, yet I find it easier to discover in unity than gnome 2
20:03:46 nrundy: i think the middle-ground is generally the best approach
20:04:43 astron247: unity is not so minimal... its a huge graphics-intense overlay
20:05:04 astron247: the overview pages are pretty massive and icon-laden
20:05:13 alexanderW: gnome 2 was more minimal
20:05:16 mirek2: I don't like Alex's interpretation of ux-control and I'd like to reword it
20:05:24 alexanderW: ?
20:05:30 mirek2: @astron: I agree about Unity
20:06:37 mirek2: I've written a response to Christoph on the mailing list about this
20:07:12 mirek2: I would say it's worth a read
20:07:14 astron247: okay... will have a look
20:07:35 * willubuntu I have to go now (exam on tomorrow). I'll keep Pidgin open in order to continue to receive all info. Bye.
20:07:50 alexanderW: bye
20:08:18 mirek2: ok; you don't have to keep Pidgin open, though: the log will be put on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Meetings/2012-06-10
20:08:22 nrundy: user interaction wise though, unity is more easy on the user. no?
20:09:05 mirek2: @nrudy: please, let's not get into the UI wars discussion; I'd say both have their pros and cons
20:09:07 astron247: bye will
20:09:11 mirek2: let's leave it at that
20:09:26 nrundy: roger. wasn't tryin to start war
20:09:40 mirek2: I know, sorry, just want to keep on topic
20:09:45 nrundy: np
20:11:11 nrundy: all i meant was that minimal interface seems to be what a lot of folk prefer. I see this a lot in L0 too. I have some photos of others LO setups. all minimal
20:11:23 astron247: @mirek: okay... not yet at the part about ux-control, ... but yes, there are different people that use different application
20:11:40 astron247: > I don't quite understand this example. Doesn't drawing behavior concern the
20:12:23 mirek2: I just meant to illustrate how I feel about minimalism
20:13:00 mirek2: avoid going a complex route when you can go a simpler route, avoid unnecessary repetition, design for needs, not for wishes
20:14:19 Mirek2_: your thoughts?
20:14:42 astron247: uhm ... did you specifically address ux-control somwhere?
20:14:55 astron247: (you did mean the mail you just sent out, right?)
20:15:30 Mirek2_: I don't think I did
20:15:49 Mirek2_: just the minimalism issue
20:16:48 Mirek2_: perhaps we could lose the ux-control principle altogether?
20:17:02 astron247: okay... so, one thing i quite firmly believe is, its easier to make good browser (i.e. viewer) ui than it is to make good editor ui
20:17:19 astron247: @mirek: no, i wouldnt want to lose that
20:17:45 astron247: novacut seems to have done that and the results seem pretty bad to me
20:17:48 Mirek2_: of course: an editor has many more features
20:18:07 astron247: nah, in an editor its harder to know what people want
20:18:11 Mirek2_: @astron: really? I think Novacut is pretty great
20:18:31 Mirek2_: @astron: you shouldn't design for what people want
20:18:41 Mirek2_: your software should have a purpose you build it for
20:18:59astron247: @wants: thats not the way i meant it
20:19:21 Mirek2_: sure, people want to share stuff online, but you're not going to make Writer into a social network; you're going to build software especially for that purpose
20:19:53 Mirek2_: Writer is a tool for making documents, and therefore should be designed for making documents
20:20:05 Mirek2_: secondary tasks should be taken care of with extensions
20:20:11 Mirek2_: as I said on the mailing list
20:20:25 nrundy: i agree with this
20:20:37 astron247: okay, what i mean is, in a viewer the appearance of a document is already set in stone, whereas in an editor you can completely redefine the appearance of it
20:20:42 nrundy: i'm worried thunderbird is adding too much extra to itself with new stuff being proposed
20:21:47 Mirek2_: @astron: not true; document readers are increasingly allowing you to set the typeface and font size of the document for better usability
20:22:10 astron247: so, your pdf reader allows you to set the font? firefox does? chrome does?
20:22:38 Mirek2_: no; I said, increasingly
20:22:47 Mirek2_: Office 15 will serve as a reader, and it will
20:22:52 Mirek2_: e-book applications do
20:22:59 Mirek2_: some of them, anyway
20:23:14Mirek2_: some mobile document viewers do
20:23:54 Mirek2_: it has a special "Read mode" for viewing documents
20:23:59 astron247: but that still is a year ahead
20:24:16astron247: and its not primarily a reader its primarily an editor
20:24:43 astron247: and yes, the viewing mode seems useful.
20:24:50 astron247: (to me, at least)
20:25:13 astron247: however, the problem is that mso isnt exactly lightweight and starts slow
20:25:48 Mirek2_: we're getting a bit off-topic here: I'm just saying that a viewer may edit the appearance of a document
20:26:22 nrundy: yes
20:26:56 astron247: sure, but always:
* on the base of what the author of the document has set
* according to peoples, eg accessibility needs
(* prefs)
20:27:54 Mirek2_: yes, by default, but it's the same with editors
20:27:59 astron247: and then, most viewers are just viewers and the options they give you for customising them are usually quiate shallow
20:28:08 Mirek2_: yes, of course
20:28:24 Mirek2_: as I said, editors have more features
20:28:44 astron247: _for a reason_
20:29:02 Mirek2_: yes
20:29:50 Mirek2_: anyway, about ux-control: I just think that is a completely subjective principle
20:30:11 astron247: sure, they all are
20:30:19 Mirek2_: theoretically, it could be used to justify our horrible Options dialog
20:30:23 Mirek2_: @astron: not really
20:30:25 nrundy: dont test show people find some ux controls easier than others?
20:30:32 Mirek2_: how so?
20:30:37 nrundy: i have terrible time with mso ribbon
20:30:49 astron247: @nick: nah, not really the topic
20:31:08 astron247: http://uxmag.com/articles/quantifying-usability
20:31:18 astron247: (see the article)
20:31:40 Mirek2_: @astron: how so?
20:32:02 astron247: oh that was directed at me...
20:32:29 Mirek2_: P.S. I feel that, with our extension infrastructure, the user will always be in control
20:32:53 Mirek2_: it's not something we need to design for: if anyone needs something, he can code/ask for an extension
20:33:51 Mirek2_: @astron: I mean, how are the principles "completely subjective"?
20:33:54 astron247: well, for instance, if you disregard control, you could make an application that, when invoked, starts writing four-letter words and then exports it to pdf and sends it to your boss.
20:34:15 astron247: that was @users will always be in control
20:34:38 Mirek2_: if that's what our application is for, then sure
20:34:51 Mirek2_: but, as I said, we need to take into account the primary purpose of our application
20:35:14 Mirek2_: which is creating documents with variable contents, shapes, and sizes
20:35:31 astron247: and how much control a user needs over her document
20:35:37 nrundy: one of the things I really like about LO is the ux control
20:35:50 nrundy: to change font, hit context-key h
20:36:00 nrundy: then have quick access to font, size, etc
20:36:18 nrundy: compare mso ribbon and it takes me much longer to adjust controls
20:36:20 astron247: so, you dont find jargon subjective?
20:36:35 nrundy: this directly affects the ease and quickness and comfort in using the software
20:36:37 Mirek2_: ux-control is more about applications doing things automatically vs. giving options for everything
20:36:54 astron247: @nick, please read the article
20:37:14 Mirek2_: @astron: it says "Users should not be required to understand any form of implementation level terminology."
20:37:37 Mirek2_: I don't think that's very subjective
20:37:46 nrundy: yes.
20:37:51 nrundy: I am speaking to article
20:37:58 nrundy: I guess it would fall in ux-feedback
20:38:38 nrundy: or maybe implementation-level as well
20:38:54 astron247: really, though? are you sure you could define "implementation-level" terminology for every possible libo feature?
20:40:02 nrundy: i am speaking directly to working in Writer and dealing with editing font, size etc which is common task as it realates to ux control
20:40:23 Mirek2_: @astron: implementation-level terminology is basically code showing through in the UI
20:40:33 astron247: its clear that you shouldnt have c++ function names in your interface, but beyond that...
20:40:46 astron247: its pretty much undefined
20:41:06 Mirek2_: @nick: but isn't the reason why you find it easier in Writer just because you're used to its shortcuts more?
20:41:21 Mirek2_: @astron: that's basically it
20:41:31 astron247: no, it goes beyond
20:41:36 nrundy: no.
20:41:38 Mirek2_: +using words like "text" or "phrase" instead of "string"
20:41:50 astron247: see...
20:42:05 Mirek2_: since, in common language, "string" isn't text
20:42:14 nrundy: I'm speaking generally here. I tap shortcut and box appears that has everything I need to interact with to accomplish that limited task
20:42:28 nrundy: I can quickly make a selection or selections and then close the box.
20:42:50 Mirek2_: isn't that the same with Office? it has shortcuts as well
20:43:18 nrundy: yet I could accomplish the same thing with the mouse with the buttons. AND I have immediate feedback from the toolbars about any changes and my current state.
20:43:44 Mirek2_: @astron: how do you understand "implementation level terminology", then?
20:44:32 nrundy: "or require the user to have access to additional information that is not found in the interface itself"
20:45:10 astron247: okay... example browsing: is "cookie" imp-level terminology?
20:45:29 astron247: should you rather use "small text file that can identify you"?
20:45:45 nrundy: well its status is not found in the interace itself. cookie
20:46:16 nrundy: unless maybe an addon is used in browser
20:46:48 Mirek2_: no, it's not imp. level terminology, just like "computer virus" isn't -- that's a word in its own right and has no synonym that would be more familiar to the common user
20:47:27 astron247: you can always create a new word, then, that would better describe what a cookie does
20:47:30 Mirek2_: "string", on the other hand, has some perfectly suitable, more understandable synonyms
20:48:53 astron247: and "computer virus" is not very much like "cookie" – "computer virus" sounds very much like sth that was created to enable non-tech folks to understand what this software does
20:49:10 astron247: (and its also a leaky metaphor in enough ways)
20:49:15 Mirek2_: @astron: I do think that the choice of the term "cookie" was rather unfortunate, but it's the only term that exists for such a thing
20:49:27 astron247: but you can create something more folksy
20:50:07 Mirek2_: sure -- you can suggest that to Firefox and Chrome developers
20:50:22 Mirek2_: it'll need to get enough traction to become commonly-used
20:50:43 astron247: thats not the point though.
20:50:53 Mirek2_: then again, they've done it with "bookmarks" vs. IE's "favorites"
20:51:06 Mirek2_: @astron: what's your point?
20:51:16 astron247: they probably think the word "cookie" is okay, while I might think its implevel terminology
20:51:20 nrundy: i think chrome nailed a lot of the articles points. this why it is successful
20:51:55 astron247: the point still is, its subjective what is and is not imp-level
20:52:14 astron247: discovery ... extremely subjective, too
20:52:42 astron247: i occasionally watch my parents in horror when they navigate menus
20:52:51 nrundy: something u notice when watching video about discovery
20:52:54 Mirek2_: @astron: I disagree. If "cookie" is the official name for a thing and doesn't have a more familiar synonym, then it's not implementation level. "Toolbar" as well.
20:53:26 Mirek2_: @astron: discovery: "Users should be able to discover functionality and information by visually exploring the interface, they should not be forced to recall information from memory."
20:53:40 nrundy: people tend to have things they try based on past experiences. based on past learning. then there is natural/subjective curiosity tendencies
20:53:41 astron247: again, toolbar, is not a good comparison ... the only thing that would be more folksy than toolbar would be toolbelt
20:53:48 Mirek2_: that just means that everything should have a visual representation
20:54:00 Mirek2_: @astron: how about Android's "action bar"?
20:54:11 astron247: what about it?
20:54:45 Mirek2_: nevermind, just think it's a better term
20:54:52 Mirek2_: with commands labeled "actions"
20:55:07 astron247: ah okay
20:57:15 Mirek2_: anyway, how about we define impl. level terminology as terminology that is relevant specifically to developers
20:57:46 astron247: its still subjective
20:58:12 Mirek2_: very slightly
20:58:48 Mirek2_: if you think of a better definition, you're welcome to share
20:59:11 Mirek2_: anyway, about discovery...
20:59:21 astron247: my point is that youll never remove the vagueness from any of the criteria
20:59:56 Mirek2_: @astron: there is inherent vagueness in everything
21:00:04 Mirek2_: even in mathematics, you could argue
21:01:04 astron247: in ux things are especially vague though
21:01:07 Mirek2_: however, I'm arguing that the vagueness in these principles is quite slight and irrelevant in most situations
21:01:22 Mirek2_: it's always a goal to go more into detail, though
21:01:31 Mirek2_: @astron: right now, yes; but they don't have to be
21:02:17 astron247: in twenty more years of psychology and when we have specific user adapted ui they wont be any more
21:03:21 Mirek2_: UI design is a science by itself
21:03:41 Mirek2_: these principles are a good beginning
21:04:00 astron247: it comes down to psychology which comes down to biology and physics ...
21:04:09 astron247: and maths
21:04:32 Mirek2_: don't forget chemistry
21:04:40 astron247: right you are
21:04:55 Mirek2_: yes, but just like physics is applied math, UX design is applied psychology
21:05:16 Mirek2_: there's plenty of reason to investigate it separately
21:05:22 Mirek2_: about discovery: it basically says that the user should be able to find a feature visually
21:06:01 Mirek2_: e.g. Windows 8's start "corner" goes against this principle
21:06:12 Mirek2_: as there's no visual indication that it goes to start
21:06:39 Mirek2_: the user has to recall that the button used to be there and then happen to accidentally hover in that corner
21:06:42 astron247: agree about that...
21:07:00 Mirek2_: where do you see the vagueness, then?
21:07:14 nrundy: discovery is built on learning
21:07:21 astron247: but i think the ui was planned with tablets in mind whose only button is a windows button
21:07:32 nrundy: if user has experience, discovery is enhanced.
21:07:33 Mirek2_: yes
21:07:48 Mirek2_: I'm just stating that it goes against this UX principle
21:08:17 nrundy: if i teach elderly neighbor, u do things on puter by going to start button. this what user looks for in a new ui
21:08:19 astron247: and then, some users might discover that when the get to lower left, a little start tile appears
21:08:23 Mirek2_: of course, hardware buttons are as much part of the UI as software buttons, so Windows is technically fine if you see the start button
21:09:00 nrundy: but hot corners r new. users have no experience with. windows users that is.
21:09:33 nrundy: so they are "easily" discoverable for people who have history.
21:09:35 Mirek2_: @astron: yes, but there's no visual indication that the user will see anything if he hovers there
21:09:38 astron247: sure, but some users might discover it, some might not
21:09:52 astron247: @mirek, oh yes there is
21:09:52 nrundy: but for users without history, they likely will never discover
21:10:18 Mirek2_: @astron: empty space isn't a visual indicator
21:10:39 nrundy: point is that the starting point of the user has to be taken into consideration with design.
21:10:49 nrundy: at least to some extent.
21:10:50 astron247: no, when you get into the corner, a little tile appears
21:10:53 Mirek2_: if you have a button on hover, that's fine as long as you have a visual indication of where to hover
21:11:02 nrundy: what does the user know? what is expected?
21:11:05 Mirek2_: in Windows, there is no visual indication to hover
21:11:30 nrundy: win8 going to be rough for most old win users
21:12:03 astron247: still, some people might discover the hot corner without the indicator, others will fail
21:12:40 Mirek2_: yes, but it goes against UX discovery, as the user can't discover the corner by "visually exploring the interface"
21:13:54 astron247: i think visually exploring does include using the mouse ... not sure though
21:14:19 nrundy: this relates well to ubuntu's "hidden" global menus.
21:14:47 nrundy: but win8 corners are still not easily discovered from moving the mouse around
21:15:21 Mirek2_: look at it this way: if you had a screenshot of the UI and were asked what to click, the user would have to be able to say what to click; then would receive another screenshot of the UI after clicking and would have to say what next, etc. until he accomplished the task
21:15:50 astron247: sure, there the ui would fail pretty badly
21:15:52 nrundy: yes
21:16:19 Mirek2_: @astron: so you understand what I mean, then?
21:16:35 Mirek2_: how would you propose to reword the principle so that this meaning is more apparent?
21:16:47 Mirek2_: and, also, do you still think this too vague?
21:16:54 nrundy: got 2 go. thx for letting me participate guys!
21:19:27 astron247: i absolutely agree that it is not terribly discoverable, but it will be more discoverable to some than to others
21:19:48 astron247: mirek, i do think the principles are well-worded.
21:20:15 astron247: maybe implementation-level is a bit difficult, but overall they are well worded
21:20:33 astron247: and i dont believe in complete objectiveness
21:20:38 astron247: sorry
21:21:29 Mirek2_: it is not completely objective, I agree, but certainly not quite as vague as many have described it
21:21:54 astron247: @alex: what do you think?
21:22:53 astron247: so, faaborg said differently and he is the guy who invented the method of using bugzilla for tracking ui issues
21:23:14 astron247: who also worked with these criteria
21:23:21 Mirek2_: in case Alex is afk, this is what he wrote previously "[19:01] <alexanderW> A statement would be useful I think. Otherwise they seem very precise"
21:23:53 Mirek2_: @astron: if we see problems, we'll try to make the principles more precise
21:24:04 Mirek2_: we'll see as we go
21:24:16 Mirek2_: just today, we hit on some
21:24:37 Mirek2_: perhaps you could help me reword the principles we discussed today to be more precise?
21:24:45 Mirek2_: I'm not much of a word smith...
21:25:22 astron247: please read what i said before. my opinion (totally subjective) = wordsmithing wont help
21:25:42 astron247: the principles are usually quite clear
21:26:07 astron247: but we still have to decide to go with one or the other
21:26:33 astron247: (btw, doesnt win8 deliver a good example of minimalism winning out over discovery?)
21:26:51 Mirek2_: @astron: again, I disagree
21:27:07 Mirek2_: minimalism and discovery deal with different things, if you just read the definition
21:27:58 Mirek2_: discovery says that the user should be able to discover all features visually, not rely on memory
21:28:28 Mirek2_: minimalism says that UIs should be as simple as possible
21:28:52 astron247: okay. so we can both agree that win8 is a pretty minmal affair (or tries to be at least)
21:28:55 Mirek2_: it's a bit hard to define: I tried my best on the mailing list
21:29:27 Mirek2_: @astron: not at all
21:29:36 Mirek2_: it has a very large surface area
21:29:49 Mirek2_: there's a lot of duplication between Metro and the classic desktop
21:30:06 astron247: disregard the metro/desktop split just look at metro
21:30:29 astron247: (if ms had followed through with what they planned)
21:31:26 Mirek2_: "ux-discovery" is disregarded with toolbars, charms, and app switching
21:31:45 astron247: right
21:31:51 Mirek2_: which actually goes against minimalism, as it makes the UI more complex than necessary
21:32:21 astron247: no, it makes the main ui (ie the program or start menu) more minimal
21:32:26 astron247: or seem more minimal
21:33:25 Mirek2_: again, minimal is defined as "as simple as possible", not as "having as few things visible as possible"
21:33:32 Mirek2_: there's a difference
21:33:44 Mirek2_: having nothing visible can make a UI incredibly complex
21:34:48 Mirek2_: again, if you think there's a better way to word the definition, be my guest
21:35:11 astron247: still, theres something called visual complexity
21:35:28 Mirek2_: yes, things shouldn't be visually complex
21:35:35 astron247: and that is what ms wanted to reduce
21:36:04 Mirek2_: if you follow both "ux-discovery" and "ux-minimalism", you have to have some visual indicators of clickable areas
21:36:31 Mirek2_: but you should avoid unnecessary bitmaps, such as Apple uses in their skeumorphic UIs
21:36:59 astron247: you read the spiekermann article too?
21:37:18 astron247: i liked it, keep in mind though, hes a ms employee.
21:37:28 Mirek2_: I've read a lot on the topic
21:37:45 Mirek2_: and I have my own opinion of it
21:38:00 Mirek2_: Android's Holo seems to be the best in this case
21:38:15 astron247: have never tried using that
21:38:23 Mirek2_: it has visual indicators for everything, yet doesn't resort to skeumorphism most of the time
21:38:37 Mirek2_: Holo is Android's new design language
21:39:07 Mirek2_: "ux-discovery" and "ux-minimalism" work hand-in-hand, IMHO, resulting in an interface that's "just right"
21:39:14 astron247: i know, but i still like to try stuff on my own and not judge from pure appearance
21:39:33 Mirek2_: right
21:40:11 astron247: although i think i did try an adroid 3 tablet once and came away confused (in a store)
21:40:32 Mirek2_: confused about what?
21:40:44 Mirek2_: Android 4 is a bit better than Android 3
21:40:47 astron247: how to use the homescreens, menu etc.
21:41:04 Mirek2_: which menu?
21:41:14 astron247: main menu ...
21:41:23 Mirek2_: the homescreen is a bit confusing, I agree
21:41:31 Mirek2_: still not sure what you mean by that menu
21:41:49 astron247: me neither, it some time ago.
21:42:08 Mirek2_: there is a menu button on older Android phones, but it's been discarded in favor of an on-screen action overflow
21:42:11 astron247: maybe android 3 doesnt really have a main menu any more?
21:42:45 Mirek2_: I don't think Android ever had a "main menu"
21:42:48 astron247: right, i have an "older android phone" myself (with 2.1)
21:43:03 astron247: and it has a main/applications menu
21:43:18 Mirek2_: Android has an application screen
21:43:51 Mirek2_: I agree that Android's home screen isn't that well-designed
21:44:27 Mirek2_: in any case, I don't think "ux-discovery" and "ux-minimalism" go against each other: they guarantee that all features can be found visually, but that there are no unnecessary elements that get in the way
21:46:03 astron247: we can agree to disagree then... which, considering that we are the only two left discussing means that this discussion ends fruitlessly
21:46:33 Mirek2_: well, it's always good to get the design principle issues out of the way
21:46:51 Mirek2_: I'd still be interested in an example in which the two would go against each other
21:47:15 Mirek2_: a visual representation of features is something necessary
21:48:09 Mirek2_: perhaps we should edit the definition of minimalism to "as simple as possible in order to accomplish the principal task"?
21:48:49 astron247: maybe
21:49:04 astron247: that would leave us to define the principal task (for every ui)
21:49:31 Mirek2_: yes -- that is something that needs to be defined, IMHO
21:50:05 Mirek2_: it doesn't need to be defined for everything right away
21:50:07 astron247: but basically its in the title of the whiteboard at hand
21:50:17 Mirek2_: exactly
21:50:24 Mirek2_: we'll just define it as we go along
21:51:13 astron247: so, right i am not against the principles, but i still think we need to prioritise them (and that theyre subjective)
21:52:40 astron247: from bokardo.com id still like to take progressive disclosure
21:52:58 Mirek2_: ok -- should we accept them as our principles, then, and deal with prioritisation if/when we come to it?
21:54:03 astron247: yes
21:54:19 Mirek2_: should we include it under "ux-minimalism"? it seems to fit
21:54:46 Mirek2_: though this one I think is a bit too vague
21:55:26 astron247: maybe discovery?
21:55:32 Mirek2_: this line is fine: "When possible, defer decisions to subsequent screens by progressively disclosing information as necessary."
21:56:22 Mirek2_: I think discovery deals with something else entirely: it just asks for everything to have a visual representation
21:56:35 Mirek2_: ux-minimalism deals with how much to show on each screen
21:57:11 astron247: ok
21:57:40 Mirek2_: is it ok if I just include "When possible, defer decisions to subsequent screens by progressively disclosing information as necessary."?
21:57:47 astron247: ok
21:58:20 Mirek2_: hold on -- I still probably wouldn't agree with it as it is
21:58:46 Mirek2_: as it's sometimes best to remain on the same screen
21:59:17 Mirek2_: but perhaps just pop up a small bar
22:00:40 Mirek2_: I don't think it can be applied in all situations
22:01:39 astron247: as i said subjective
22:02:09 Mirek2_: I still don't think Mozilla's principles are that subjective
22:02:22 Mirek2_: this one principles is, IMHO, not applicable to all UIs
22:02:57 Mirek2_: especially when it's not standard to have several screens on a desktop environment
22:03:15 astron247: okay.. shall we move on?
22:03:15 Mirek2_: dialogs, pop-ups, maybe, but screens rarely
22:03:30 astron247: ms uses it for their ribbons
22:03:42 astron247: and menus also use it
22:04:31 Mirek2_: it can't be talking about "screens" then?
22:05:04 astron247: opened menus are in a way the next screen
22:05:53 Mirek2_: still, if we're talking technically, the screen (as in the whole screen) shows a lot of unnecessary info: the apps toolbar, all the windows hovering behind the app, etc.
22:06:53 astron247: i dont think you can take it that literally with windowed uis
22:07:16 Mirek2_: but all the principles have to be taken literally; otherwise, they're badly worded
22:07:40 astron247: guess i agree there
22:08:39 Mirek2_: (I really don't mean to attack you or anything; after all, I'm the one who suggested these principles, but now that I look at this one, it's a bit too vague for me)
22:09:18 Mirek2_: (and you are the one who brought up Mozilla's principles)
22:09:42 Mirek2_: if you can think of a better wording, though...
22:10:03 Mirek2_: for now, I'll put make Mozilla's principles the standard
22:10:18 Mirek2_: would it be OK if I left out ux-control
22:10:29 astron247: no
22:10:42 Mirek2_: I feel determining the feeling a user gets from a UI is quite subjective
22:11:02 Mirek2_: would you mind rewording it then, to not deal with the feeling of a user, but rather with the UI itself?
22:11:08 astron247: square one?
22:11:26 Mirek2_: :)
22:11:37 Mirek2_: let's at least get this principle out of the way
22:11:38 astron247: no, it should be about the users feeling
22:11:51 astron247: having complete control over the ui is not helpful
22:12:08 astron247: and does not create the feeling of control, rather that of insecurity
22:12:16 Mirek2_: well, we could also have a principle that says users should feel good about the UI...
22:12:29 Mirek2_: ok...
22:12:37 astron247: i see what you did there
22:13:18 Mirek2_: I'm just trying to capture how vague the principle feels
22:13:39 astron247: can you replace it with anything better?
22:13:47 Mirek2_: any designer could say that he doesn't feel like he has control over a given interface
22:14:03 astron247: we could surely define areas where users are more sensible than in others, eg. privacy
22:14:47 Mirek2_: if a default can interfere with the needs of the user, the user needs to be made aware of the option to change the default
22:15:07 Mirek2_: and I tried to describe needs vs. wants on the mailing list
22:15:29 Mirek2_: though I could have gone into more detail, perhaps
22:15:37 astron247: phew...
22:16:36 astron247: do you really think that makes it better or clearer?
22:16:37 Mirek2_: privacy would be a need
22:16:47 Mirek2_: yes
22:17:05 Mirek2_: because I know that, in many cases, designers argue about their own feeling
22:18:15 Mirek2_: when we have the needs of the user defined, we can say what options the user needs to be made aware of and which options he is free to discover himself if he wants them
22:18:34 astron247: @designer/feeling: that wont change, except maybe björn might help us get rid of that
22:19:20 Mirek2_: by "that", do you mean unsubstantiated arguments based on feeling alone?
22:19:27 astron247: yes
22:19:54 Mirek2_: yeah, that's something we should get rid of
22:20:09 Mirek2_: are you ok with that wording, then?
22:20:25 Mirek2_: and should I attach a definition of needs vs. wants to the principles page?
22:20:54 Mirek2_: and that every piece of UI should have a "primary purpose"
22:21:42 astron247: mirek, please, i beg you, instead rethink the objectivism/subjectivism part and then maybe amend that we dont want complete control over everything
22:22:48 Mirek2_:  hold on -- so what should I publish as our principles?
22:23:33 astron247: publish them as preliminary, keep control please, and add that it really is about the feeling
22:24:28 Mirek2_:  are there any issues you see with my wording?
22:25:05 Mirek2_: (btw, non-related: do you have a full log of this chat? could you put it on the wiki?)
22:25:36 astron247: yes, i can
22:26:21 astron247: ok, how about you just add your wording to the existing description?
22:26:48 Mirek2_: alright
22:27:02 Mirek2_: I guess we're done then?
22:27:07 astron247: ok,can we come to the start centre thing shortly?
22:27:16 Mirek2_: sure
22:27:17 astron247: you havent already posted to g+?
22:27:25 Mirek2_: not yet
22:27:36 astron247: okay, first, sorry for the delay
22:27:53 Mirek2_: that's ok
22:28:21 astron247: second, basically, if you want to just copy my message from the mailing list, keep the june 29 date
22:28:40 astron247: (so we can discuss proposals in the chat)
22:29:04 Mirek2_: hold on -- which message?
22:29:26 astron247: ah my announcement message i meant
22:29:36 astron247: for the splashes
22:29:51 astron247: (minus the one or other requirement that doesnt fit)
22:29:55 Mirek2_: alright
22:30:26 Mirek2_: and the G+ post can be shorter, I hope?
22:30:40 Mirek2_: the requirements are on the playground itself, after all
22:31:02 astron247: @g+: sure, maybe link to the announcement
22:31:20 Mirek2_: great
22:31:32 Mirek2_: is it ok if I just link to the playground?
22:31:45 Mirek2_: that page should house all the necessary info
22:32:17 astron247: okay. but then please add links from there to the motif and branding pages
22:32:32 Mirek2_: alright
22:33:10 Mirek2_: when you post the IRC log, could you leave it unabridged?
22:33:34 astron247: you seem to distrust me ;) for good reason
22:33:38 Mirek2_: I noticed that you abridged quite a few things when posting a log from a chat when I wasn't here
22:33:42 astron247: but yes, i will
22:33:57 Mirek2_: thanks
22:34:08 astron247: i discussed building with alex which i found was OT enough to leave it out
22:34:39 astron247: ok, have good night then
22:34:59 Mirek2_: good night