Design/Meetings/2013-06-09

From The Document Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Cast (in order of appearance)

  • issa
  • astron
  • ahmd
  • mirek2
  • mahfiaz

Topics

  • Writer default template
  • Flat Icons

Log

[16:08] <issa> hello astron
[16:10] <ahmd_> hello
[16:10] <issa> hello ahmd
[16:12] <astron> hi
[16:13] <ahmd_> astron247: I was discussing with issa the default theme of Writer
[16:13] <astron> oh ok
[16:14] <ahmd_> I've noticed many wrong things in the paragraph spacing, default fonts, headings sizes
[16:15] <ahmd_> it doesn't look professional
[16:16] <ahmd_> and I believe this is an easy win for Writer if we got it right
[16:16] <astron> ah ... we had this topic before.
[16:17] <astron> so, for the default fonts, we can only do so much – it is supposed to always look right, and to this day i believe the only fonts that are always installed with libo are the liberation fonts
[16:18] <ahmd_> yes, i agree with you
[16:18] <astron> (because linux vendors like to package everything separately and tend to not ship the newer fonts weve added to libo)
[16:18] <ahmd_> but what should be the default, sans-serif or serif?
[16:19] <astron> that said, i think some things used to be hard-coded somewhere
[16:19] <astron> ahmd_: well, i cant really say. its up to whoever does the default template
[16:20] <astron> but the way it is, and the way many people still do it: you pick a sans for the headlines and a serif for the text
[16:20] <astron> but theres not really a way to get it right in all circumstances
[16:21] <astron> (ie screen text is often quite the opposite – because of the low resolution of most screens)
[16:21] <ahmd_> i think sans is better to be the default
[16:22] <ahmd_> because it works on the screen and on the paper
[16:22] <ahmd_> not like sans-serif which look a bit noisy on screen
[16:23] <ahmd_> sorry serif
[16:23] <ahmd_> i can see most word processors now are using sans as default font
[16:24] <astron> at the same time, it might only be two to three years until high resolution displays (think, retina macbooks, tablets) are widespread (at least in the western world)
[16:27] <astron> so ... i dont really know
[16:29] <ahmd__> what do you think, should we proceed and have sans as the default font for paragraphs?
[16:30] <astron> ahmd_: i cant really tell you. although i believe liberation serif is quite robust in screen settings
[16:31] <astron> and i can tell you that i like liberation sans even less than arial (which it is supposed to copy).
[16:31] <ahmd__> issa?
[16:31] <astron> issa: oh good
[16:32] <issa> I prefer a serif font because it looks more elegant in both print and pdf documents
[16:33] <issa> (and I'd say that's where you would encounter most documents produced by writer)
[16:35] <astron> issa: liberation serif isnt really elegant, its more of a workhorse serif if you will...
[16:36] <issa> well compared to liberation sans anyway
[16:36] <astron> right
[16:36] <issa> (I've never used them much tbh)
[16:39] <astron> right. after all, they are replacement fonts for arial and times new roman, first and foremost
[16:40] <ahmd__> ok, so do we leave the default paragraph font as serif?
[16:41] <astron> i dont know. you may want to try both and put it on the list..?
[16:42] <astron> btw: ahmd__, are you one of the kacst people?
[16:43] <ahmd__> yes :)
[16:43] <astron> ok.
[16:45] <astron> is there actually any sort of sans/serif distinction in arabic? or anything that replaces it?
[16:45] <issa> no proper distinction
[16:45] <astron> ok
[16:50] <astron> anyway, alexander wilms had started on a new default writer template before.
[16:50] <astron> not sure if you already knew this
[16:51] <ahmd__> did he finish it?
[16:51] <astron> not really.
[16:53] <ahmd__> regardless default font, there are other important issues
[16:55] <ahmd__> paragraphs are not separated by default, headings,...
[16:55] <astron> yes.
[16:55] <astron> sorry. i tried to find alex's efforts, but wasnt lucky so far
[16:55] <ahmd__> try heading2 and 3
[16:56] <mirek> sorry for being so, so late
[16:56] <ahmd__> hi mirek2 
[16:56] <mirek> given how many of you are here, I assume you've started?
[16:56] <mirek> hi everyone
[16:57] <ahmd__> we are discussing the default Writer template
[16:57] <mirek> ok, cool
[17:00] <ahmd__> do you know where can i find code for default template?
[17:00] <astron> i think you could ask cedric...
[17:01] <astron> but i think there was a way to just use a normal template instead of the hardcoded values
[17:03] <mirek> alex's efforts: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Are-you-okay-with-those-new-default-styles-td3989652.html
[17:03] <astron> ah, thanks!
[17:04] <mirek> :) you're welcome
[17:05] <astron> mind you, there were a few things, most people didn't like about it:
* colour – thats a bit expressive for the default template
* too different headline sizes
* etc.
[17:06] <mirek> ahmd__: you're clearly motivated to make a new default template, so how about you send a proposal to the list and we'll judge it then?
[17:06] <mirek> a couple of rules, though:
[17:06] <mirek> * must be black-and-white, for printing purposes
[17:07] <mirek> * must use the Liberation fonts, for compatibility purposes
[17:07] <mirek> (the fonts have the same metrics as Arial, Times New Roman, and Courier so that the document layout is the same on every machine)
[17:08] <mirek> * in general, it must be print-friendly (e.g. no flashing text :) )
[17:09] <ahmd__> ok, i'll make two templates and send it to the design list
[17:10] <mirek> sounds good :)
[17:10] <astron> btw, ahmd__: what do you think is so wrong about the current h2 and h3? (not that i love them, but what sticks out to you?)
[17:11] <ahmd__> astron247: you can't decide priority between them (which one is higher)
[17:12] <ahmd__> actually h3 feels h2 and vice versa
[17:12] <astron> ok. right
[17:13] <astron> if one of them weren't bold, it would indeed help
[17:13] <astron> especially because bold italics are a bit nasty anyway
[17:14] <ahmd__> try to make h1: 24px bold, h2: 19px bold, h3: 16px bold, h4: 13px bold
[17:14] <ahmd__> this is what i think about for headings
[17:15] <ahmd__> and what about having 11 heading levels? there is nothing on Earth that uses 11 heading levels
[17:18] <mirek> I agree
[17:19] <ahmd_> agree on?
[17:19] <mirek> if you look at the current state, though, the last few levels aren't differentiated in any way
[17:19] <mirek> agree that 11 may be a bit too many
[17:20] <mirek> on the other hand, though, you never know...
[17:21] <mirek> anyway, perhaps we should move to a different topic?
[17:22] <ahmd_> ok
[17:22] <mirek> astron247: have you been attending ESC calls?
[17:23] <astron> no
[17:23] <mirek> alright
[17:23] <astron> but i should be next week
[17:23] <mirek> ok, sounds good
[17:23] <mirek> issa, how is the icon pack going?
[17:24] <mirek> have you asked about packaging it in unstable builds?
[17:24] <issa> not yet
[17:25] <mirek> ok
[17:25] <issa> I don't think anyone would refuse it tbh, but I'm just waiting for a more polished state
[17:25] <issa> at least for the shapes
[17:25] <mirek> how are the shapes doing?
[17:26] <mirek> have they been updated from what I saw last?
[17:26] <issa> no
[17:26] <mirek> ok
[17:26] <issa> Norah needs more specific comments about each of them
[17:26] <issa> I will need to go through them one by one soon
[17:27] <mirek> honestly, I might prefer to just tweak them myself
[17:27] <mirek> when/if I have time
[17:28] <mirek> (trying to explain exactly what my issues are with a certain icon often feels harder to me)
[17:28] <issa> if you have time within the next two weeks or so that would be great
[17:28] <mirek> on the topic of icons, I don't suppose there's anyone who would like to pick up on the orphaned Tango testing icons
[17:29] <mirek> or at least encourage others to do so
[17:29] <mirek> the pack could be pushed in portion by portion
[17:30] <mirek> I was thinking we could get the shapes done first
[17:30] <mirek> as those should be the simplest in this case
[17:31] <issa> I'm pretty full at the moment, and I'm not really fond of them
[17:31] <mirek> of the Tango testing icons in general, or just the shape icons?
[17:31] <mirek> the shape icons in particular are, imho, much better than the current set
[17:32] <issa> the Tango testing icons
[17:33] <mirek> ok
[17:33] <mirek> I'm not fond of some of them either
[17:34] <mirek> but, then again, I'm not that fond of the current set
[17:36] <mirek> so, no takers for the task, I guess...
[17:36] <issa> the shading on the icons containing letters in particular is bad
[17:36] <mirek> any other topics to cover?
[17:36] <issa> while we are on icons..
[17:36] <issa> I did label the latest batch of icons I made for impress http://i.imgur.com/NbA8A35.png
[17:37] <mirek> the sizing seems a bit inconsistent
[17:38] <mirek> for example, compare undo/redo with some of the icons on the left
[17:39] <mirek> maybe that's just me, though...
[17:39] <mirek> other than that, they seem quite good :)
[17:40] <issa> I don't like the line icon but didn't what else to use (far left)
[17:41] <mirek> yeah, you're right, that should be different
[17:41] <issa> any suggestions?
[17:41] <mirek> (the icon looks good, but it should represent the pen tool, not the stroke)
[17:42] <issa> (the icon looks good because it's straight from Inkscape :p)
[17:42] <mirek> :)
[17:43] <mirek> perhaps just a line?
[17:43] <mirek> with a wrench next to it?
[17:44] <mirek> (the wrench represents "options" in the Gnome icon set)
[17:45] <mirek> (for example, in the new Gnome PDF viewer, the Document options menu is represented by a document page and a wrench to the right of it)
[17:45] <issa> I doubt it would look good, but I'll try
[17:46] <mirek> rather than next to it, perhaps I should have said overlaying it
[17:46] <mirek> take a look at the Document Options icon before doing the line icon
[17:47] <issa> I did use these for the character and paragraph icons respectively http://i.imm.io/18MtG.png
[17:48] <mirek> the wrench you're using doesn't seem like gnome's
[17:49] <mirek> could you replace it for Gnome's?
[17:49] <mirek> also, perhaps the wrench could overlay the symbols?
[17:50] <astron> mirek2: it already slightly overlays the "a" in the first version
[17:50] <astron> i wouldnt overdo it so much that you cant recognise the a anymore
[17:50] <issa> astron247: exactly
[17:51] <mirek> touché, though I would still say that it could be a bit higher
[17:51] <issa> I actually wanted to add it to the line and area icons but they weren't recognizable anymore
[17:51] <issa> the wrench is from gnome but it was part of another icon, didn't know about the one you are talking about
[17:52] <mirek> if you have the gnome-stencils.svg file from the gnome-icon-theme-symbolic github repo, the icon I'm talking about is at the end of the second row
[17:54] <issa> I don't have it now but I'll check it later
[17:54] <mirek> btw, here's how Expression Design portrays fill/outline: http://www.grafika.cz/old-idif/grafika/images6/expression_web3_04.png
[17:55] <mirek> fill is a large filled rectangle while outline is an empty rectangle with a very thick stroke
[17:57] <issa> but it's called "area"
[17:57] <mirek> isn't it the same thing, though?
[17:57] <mirek> just noticed Inkscape has icons for outline and fill as well
[17:58] <mirek> on its tabs
[17:58] <mirek> rectangles as well
[17:59] <issa> I suppose, but I mean it's both fill and outline
[18:00] <mirek> "area" seems to only concern the fill
[18:01] <mirek> "line" seems to only concern the outline
[18:01] <mirek> they're just different names
[18:01] <mirek> or am I missing something?
[18:03] <issa> right
[18:04] <issa> ok makes sense
[18:06] <mirek> any comments about the icons from anyone else?
[18:07] <astron> hm, the raster icon is weird, i think
[18:07] <astron> (display gird)
[18:08] <astron> it looks fuzzy and different from the others
[18:10] <issa> I don't see it
[18:10] <issa> it's different because it's the only one with single pixels
[18:10] <astron> right
[18:11] <mirek> I like it
[18:11] <mirek> if you have a different vision for it, though, perhaps you could propose a different one?
[18:12] <astron> how about using the lighter grey colour for the lines and the darker for the edges?
[18:14] <issa> sure, will try that
[18:14] <astron> just an idea
[18:14] <astron> thanks
[18:14] <mirek> sounds good
[18:15] <mirek> anything else with the icons?
[18:15] <astron> hm, i guess there is the issue with the zoom and search icon being the same..?
[18:16] <issa> like this http://i.imm.io/18MFt.png
[18:16] <issa> (I missed one pixel!)
[18:17] <astron> hm, can you do solid instead of dashed lines?
[18:18] <astron> (i mean for the lighter lines)
[18:18] <issa> but the grid is actually dotted
[18:18] <astron> ok. right.
[18:19] <astron> still can you try?
[18:23] <astron> (just tried it, though very inexactly, and it looks okayisher to me)
[18:24] <issa> http://i.imm.io/18MIx.png
[18:24] <issa> I don't like it
[18:25] <mirek> I prefer the previous one as well
[18:26] <astron> ok. then im alone in this, i guess.
[18:27] <astron> also, the inside (the compass needle) of the navigator icon looks too little like a triangle to me somehow
[18:33] <issa> what do you propose?
[18:34] <astron> not really sure here
[18:34] <astron> just pointing out theres a legibility problem
[18:35] <mirek> an eyeglass with a + or a -?
[18:35] <mirek> a + seems to be most common: http://thenounproject.com/noun/zoom/#icon-No1669
[18:36] <issa> mirek2: we're talking about the navigator (the one left of zoom)
[18:36] <mirek> oh, sorry
[18:36] <mirek> seems like we skipped over the zoom icon, though
[18:36] <astron> (but the zoom icon is another issue)
[18:37] <astron> yes ... 
[18:37] <mirek> I find the Navigator icon acceptable, but I agree it could use improvements
[18:37] <mirek> I'd leave it as is for now, though
[18:37] <mirek> and focus on the other icons
[18:37] <mirek> perhaps, in time, someone will come along and make it better
[18:39] <mirek> as for zoom metaphors, in sliders, Apple employs a small shape on one end and then a visibly larger one on the other
[18:39] <mirek> don't see a practical way of utilizing that metaphor in a square icon, though
[18:40] <astron> hm, no. me neither
[18:40] <astron> but the < and > in the icon are actually a good idea
[18:41] <mirek> ok
[18:41] <mirek> issa: does that sound doable?
[18:41] <issa> I didn't quite get it
[18:41] <astron> (its from the the noun project page mirek linked to)
[18:41] <astron> not my idea
[18:43] <issa> you're saying this for the page width icon?
[18:43] <mirek> for the zoom icon
[18:43] <issa> oh
[18:44] <issa> I don't quite get it but it should be doable
[18:44] <astron> well, the issue is, that the zoom and search icon would look the same otherwise
[18:44] <issa> true
[18:45] <issa> sorry all but I have to leave now
[18:45] <astron> ok.
[18:45] <astron> we should finish anyway, i think
[18:45] <issa> you should possibly discuss the latest color picker
[18:46] <issa> bye
[18:46] <mirek> hi mahfiaz
[18:47] <mahfiaz> hi mirek2
[18:47] <mirek> any topic that you'd like to discuss?
[18:48] <mahfiaz> nope, I just came to see if you have already done for today
[18:48] <mirek> astron247: would you like to discuss the color picker?
[18:48] <mirek> personally, I'd like to put it off until issa is here
[18:48] <mirek> as he designed the latest tentative design
[18:49] <mirek> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Color_Picker
[18:49] <astron> i havent really looked at it, so...
[18:49] <mirek> next week, then?
[18:50] <astron> i suppose
[18:50] <mirek> ok
[18:50] <mirek> is Sunday good for you next week?
[18:50] <astron> probably not.
[18:50] <mirek> and Saturday?
[18:51] <astron> maybe
[18:51] <mirek> the thing is, I won't be able to attend Saturday...
[18:51] <mirek> ... but I don't like the chat being moved because of me
[18:53] <mirek> so if you're able to attend on Saturday, perhaps you could lead the chat next week?
[18:53] <astron> ok. lets see
[18:54] <astron> i can try to.
[18:54] <mirek> alright
[18:55] <mirek> could you announce on the list that the next chat will be on Saturday again? :)
[18:55] <astron> lets tentatively do it saturday, if no one shows up, well do it sunday
[18:55] <mirek> alright
[18:55] <astron> mirek2: ok
[18:56] <mirek> it seems like we're done for today
[18:56] <mirek> astron247: given that you've been here longest today, could you put up the log?
[18:56] <astron> shall i put up the log?
[18:56] <astron> ok... then
[18:56] <mirek> :) thanks
[18:56] <astron> bye