Design/Meetings/2014-08-31

    From The Document Foundation Wiki

    TDF LibreOffice Document Liberation Project Community Blogs Weblate Nextcloud Redmine Ask LibreOffice Donate

    Attendees

    • bitigchi
    • jphilipz
    • LLyaudet
    • mahfiaz
    • mirek
    • Papamatti


    Topics

    • Use of Redmine, abandon of the mailing list
    • Purpose of Writer
    • Improvement of Tooltip Texts

    Log

    [13:59] == LLyaudet [58ab762a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.88.171.118.42] has joined #libreoffice-design
[13:59] <LLyaudet> Hi everyone :)
[14:00] <jphilipz> hi LLyaudet, you know what time the meeting is today
[14:00] == mirek2 [56311b91@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.49.27.145] has joined #libreoffice-design
[14:00] <LLyaudet> It should start now
[14:00] <mirek2> hi guys
[14:00] <LLyaudet> Hi Mirek
[14:00] <jphilipz> hi mirek2
[14:01] <Papamatti> Hi
[14:01] <jphilipz> hi Papamatti
[14:01] <Papamatti> :-)
[14:01] <LLyaudet> Ok Let's start with the first topic : Use of Redmine
[14:01] <mirek2> I'm much happier with Redmine than I expected
[14:02] <mirek2> and am fully in favor of letting go of our mailing list for it
[14:02] <LLyaudet> It seems it was a success indeed
[14:02] <mirek2> what are your thoughts on it?
[14:03] <Papamatti> I think it is very useful
[14:03] <Papamatti> (Embed pictures and so on is possible, also)
[14:03] <mirek2> agreed
[14:04] <LLyaudet> Yes embedding pictures is a reallly good thing
[14:04] <mirek2> would everyone here agree with using the forum instead of the mailing list then, for good?
[14:04] <LLyaudet> I'm ok.
[14:05] <Papamatti> yes
[14:05] <jphilipz> i dont really have an opinion :)
[14:05] <jphilipz> quite new to redmine
[14:05] <LLyaudet> Nobody disagreed either on the mailing list or on Redmine by replying to my messages.
[14:06] <mirek2> ok, great -- I'll contact the website people, tell them to point to Redmine instead of the list
[14:06] <LLyaudet> We can still use the mailing list for general announcements
[14:06] <LLyaudet> and newcomers can ask question on the mailing list also
[14:06] <mirek2> I wouldn't use it for that, as it's never really been used for that
[14:06] <mirek2> there is a special mailing list for users
[14:07] <mirek2> and new designers should go to the Redmine forums
[14:07] <LLyaudet> I think the monthly announcement for the IRC meeting should still be on the mailing list for example
[14:08] <mirek2> the problem here is of stretching across too many platforms, though
[14:08] <mirek2> I'd like to remove all traces of the mailing list (except for links to archives, of course)
[14:08] <mirek2> for simplicity's sake
[14:09] <LLyaudet> Well I wasn't expecting to drop the ailing list totally
[14:09] <Papamatti> yes, I agree with LLyaudet. But there is already a list "announces" which we could use, also.
[14:10] <mirek2> the announce list isn't suitable for team-related announcements
[14:10] <LLyaudet> regular announcements like the one for the IRC meeting would clutter redmine forum
[14:10] <Papamatti> ok
[14:11] <mirek2> LLyaudet: we need these announcements on the forum anyway, though -- people need to be able to respond with topics for the chat
[14:11] <mirek2> (we could delete these announcements afterwards, though -- the forum has that option)
[14:11] <LLyaudet> Mirek: you know there is hardly any reply. Today IRC chat was the exception
[14:12] <LLyaudet> Ok if we delete the announcements when there is no reply
[14:12] <mirek2> ok, sounds good to me :)
[14:13] <mirek2> if we're all agreed on this, I'll contact the website people
[14:13] <LLyaudet> Do we give one week for people on the mailing list to react ?
[14:14] <mirek2> that sounds good
[14:14] <mirek2> will you write to the list?
[14:14] <LLyaudet> Ok I'll do it after the chat
[14:15] <mirek2> (please ask for concrete problems -- messages like "I don't like Redmine" are of no use)
[14:15] <LLyaudet> ok no problem
[14:15] <mirek2> thanks
[14:15] <mirek2> next topic? purpose definitons?
[14:16] <mirek2> should we start with Writer?
[14:16] <LLyaudet> ok can you summarize what has been said on the mailing list and redmine about purpose defintions for the modules ?
[14:18] <mirek2> let's start with Writer, then
[14:19] <mirek2> so these are the purpose proposals:
[14:20] <mirek2> * crafting a predominantly textual printable material
[14:20] <mirek2> * creating printable pages of primarily formatted text, in addition to supporting graphics and table
[14:20] <mirek2> * crafting ready-to-publish text materials
[14:20] <mirek2> (the end of the second one should read "tables")
[14:21] <mirek2> the full discussion is on https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/boards/1/topics/21
[14:21] <LLyaudet> the discussion started on the mailing list a few weeks before if I remember correctly
[14:22] <mirek2> I touched on the topic a few times before (with Impress), but I think this is the most generic and relevant thread
[14:23] <mirek2> (the other threads sometimes mistook the purpose definition for a marketing slogan, which wasn't the point at all)
[14:25] <mirek2> here are the relevant ml threads: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Finding-a-Purpose-td4114430.html , http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-purpose-of-Impress-td4092904.html
[14:27] <mirek2> honestly, though, I'd like to stick to the Redmine thread, as I feel I didn't really explain the point of defining purposes in the other threads
[14:28] <mirek2> (in any case, Writer's purpose was, I believe, discussed on Redmine only)
[14:29] <mirek2> anyway, I'm still in favor of "crafting a predominantly textual printable material" over the other purpose definitons
[14:30] <mirek2> the second one unnecessarily defines additional document elements (which don't necessarily cover all elements -- formulas, for example)
[14:31] <mirek2> and the third one is too vague (ready-to-publish can mean a lot of things) and a bit misleading ("text materials" sounds like the materials are only comprised of text)
[14:32] <mirek2> that's just my view -- what do you think?
[14:39] <LLyaudet> ok it would have been simpler with one thread for each module ;)
[14:39] <mirek2> :)
[14:40] <LLyaudet> 1 is slightly to vague and short in my opinion
[14:40] <Papamatti> I like documents more instead of material.
[14:40] <LLyaudet> agree
[14:41] <Papamatti> Sounds like text printed on stone or wood plates ;-)
[14:42] <Papamatti> (But in theory....possible)
[14:42] <LLyaudet> We can keep 1 : "crafting a predominantly textual printable document" but add other sentences to make the meaning more explicit
[14:43] <LLyaudet> I don't think we should try to have purposes that fits in one sentence only
[14:44] <mirek2> the reason why I refrained from using the word "document" was because the term is actually incredibly broad
[14:44] <LLyaudet> not that a lengthy purpose is a good option
[14:44] <mirek2> "a predominantly textual printable material" is how I would define a document
[14:45] <LLyaudet> no a printed photo in a file is a document
[14:45] <mirek2> LLyaudet: rather than argue about length, please specify what exactly is too vague
[14:45] <mirek2> LLyaudet: it depends on the definition -- see dictionary.reference.com/browse/document
[14:46] <LLyaudet> predominantly textual is nice and concise but it makes sense to explicit that graphics, tables, formulas for example may be added
[14:46] <mirek2> one of the definitions is "a computer data file" -- that could really be anything
[14:47] <mirek2> LLyaudet: why? "predominantly textual" makes it obvious that other elements may be added and "printable" that they must be accessible for printing if they are to be shared (meaning no videos or sounds)
[14:47] <mirek2> listing the options just limits our imaginations
[14:47] <LLyaudet> no you can use etc. at the end
[14:47] <mirek2> (we can easily forget elements)
[14:48] <mirek2> it's not necessary
[14:48] <LLyaudet> it's always best to give examples
[14:49] <mirek2> LLyaudet: I agree, but examples should be given in addition to the purpose definition, not in it. (Like dictionary definitions -- have a clear definition and then several example sentences or explanatory notes.)
[14:51] <Papamatti> I think the first one is ok.
[14:51] <LLyaudet> Mirek: You can see it that way but as for a dictionnary you find both in the same place so ok lets say we will write on the wiki *Purpose definition: ... and just below *Complements to the purpose definition:...
[14:51] <LLyaudet> I prefer to say we write 2-3 sentences
[14:52] <LLyaudet> The first sentence may be considered the "core purpose definition" if you want
[14:54] <mirek2> LLyaudet: Not sure what you mean with regards to a dictionary. Dictionaries tend to have short, succinct definitions. Usage notes and examples may follow, but they're separated (perhaps not always clearly, though, to save space).
[14:55] <LLyaudet> They are contiguous. You don't find the definition on page 12 and the examples on page 30
[14:56] <mirek2> Yes -- if we have examples, notes, explanations, they should be on the same page.
[14:56] <mirek2> Anyway, rather than argue what additional sentences we should have, let's talk about whether they're really needed. What does the proposed purpose definition allow that shouldn't be allowed? What holes are in it?
[14:58] <mirek2> (Also, keep in mind that, for newcomers, our principles, guidelines, workflows, etc. are a lot to take in. We should be specific to minimize confusion, but we should also be succinct to minimize time spent learning.)
[14:58] <LLyaudet> They are really needed in order to be more concrete. That's the goal of examples. I have no problem with "crafting a predominantly textual printable document"; I see no hole or contradiction
[15:00] <LLyaudet> There is one thing missing : the fact that with writer you craft text formatted on a page layout not a plan, a sphere, etc. ;)
[15:01] <mirek2> what do you mean by "a plan" or "a sphere"?
[15:01] <mirek2> if you're talking about paper shape, "printable" basically implies that it's a rectangular shape
[15:01] <LLyaudet> depends of the printer
[15:02] <LLyaudet> with 3D printer you can have a sphere
[15:02] <mirek2> if circular paper becomes mainstream, I don't see why we shouldn't support it
[15:02] <LLyaudet> well the purpose will hardly be focused I fear
[15:03] <Papamatti> sticker, labels, overhead sheets
[15:03] <Papamatti> envelopes
[15:05] <mirek2> should we specify paper as the output material? should the focus be on long-form content?
[15:06] <mirek2> or should we specify that the text should be broken up into paragraphs?
[15:06] <mirek2> (I'd be fine with all three of these -- helps really get the focus down. That doesn't mean Writer couldn't be used for stickers, just that its UI would be tailored more toward paragraph-based content.)
[15:07] <LLyaudet> I would not specify paper but would specify "bounded width" since either on screen or on paper page, the width is bounded and the continuation of the document comes mainly with "vertical" scrolling or " page changing"
[15:08] <mirek2> -=
[15:08] <mirek2> =--/=
[15:08] <mirek2> =
[15:08] <mirek2> sorry, that was accidental
[15:09] <mirek2> well, the height is fixed as well, so I'd go with "fixed dimensions"
[15:10] <LLyaudet> the height is fixed for a page but not for the whole document, that's why I said "bounded width" but we can say that the document is splitted in pages of fixed dimensions
[15:12] <mirek2> that height isn't really a property of the document though -- you could just as well navigate through pages horizontally
[15:12] <LLyaudet> yes you could but that's not the purpose of writer
[15:13] <LLyaudet> we have the side bar because we don't do that for example
[15:14] <mirek2> It has nothing to do with Writer -- it's simply the way pages are arranged. We could just as well arrange them differently on a tablet, where horizontal scrolling is simpler, but it wouldn't change the purpose of the software.
[15:14] <mirek2> anyway, we're getting a bit off-topic here...
[15:14] <LLyaudet> no we're right on the topic
[15:14] <mirek2> how about this: crafting a document consisting primarily of paragraphs and split into pages of fixed dimensions
[15:15] <mirek2> (first draft, could probably be reworded in a better way)
[15:15] <LLyaudet> I would not consider that writer should adapt to all possible ways the pages are arranged
[15:16] <mirek2> it's a UI decision though; UI decisions need to be based on the purpose definiton, not the other way around
[15:17] <mirek2> a purpose is about defining what it's for, not what it looks/works/acts like
[15:18] <LLyaudet> Your distinction between UI decision and purpose is arbitrary
[15:19] <mirek2> how so? once you print or send your document, you have no bearing on how the pages will be arranged except for the order that they're arranged in
[15:20] <mirek2> we could specify that the pages should be laid out one below the other, but the thing is, when you print them, they're not, when you switch to "book view", they're not, ...
[15:23] <mirek2> if you have questions about where I see the distinction between UI decision and purpose, go ahead and ask; if not, let's move on
[15:24] <Papamatti> Maybe in future, I think it should merged all together into one editor. Possibly, the document types are organised in layers, text layer, drawing layer and impress is in my opinion only a picture viewer, wich you could also do with every writer document or drawing.
[15:25] <Papamatti> One odf-file which contains all like the global document
[15:25] <LLyaudet> the purpose implicitly includes to adapt to existing " tools" : printer, screen, mouse, keyboard, etc. It's arbitrary to say that the choice of certains tools is purely a UI decision. It can be a part of the purpose to not explictly support all tools in order to concentrate on some. Thre is no clear limit between both in this respect
[15:25] <Papamatti> And you can decide on each page, is it a textpage, drawing or a table....ok I'm dreaming....
[15:27] <mirek2> LLyaudet: the purpose is about what it's for; the tools arise from that implicitly, but the purpose shouldn't define the tools
[15:28] == abhra [~dr@112.79.37.159] has joined #libreoffice-design
[15:29] <LLyaudet> we define part of the tools when we say "printable". that's what I mean
[15:29] <mirek2> that's an external tool, though
[15:31] <LLyaudet> Yes but more importantly it is a tool that is used at the end of the process. I think it can be misleading to think that the purpose is about the tools that come at the end of the process and UI decisions are about tools that come at the beginning of the process
[15:32] <LLyaudet> Sometimes it is best to have clear view of the whole process
[15:32] <LLyaudet> I hope you understood my point of view (you may agree or not)
[15:32] <mirek2> for example, imagine that you need to get over a fence; the purpose of your invention is to get over the fence; you could design a ladder, you could design special shoes for the purpose, and clearly you have to work with what you have, but none of that's part of the purpose; the fence is an external dependency, core to your invention
[15:33] <mirek2> here, we're building something to produce printable material
[15:33] == abhra [~dr@112.79.37.159] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
[15:33] <mirek2> thus, a printer is an external dependency -- we're counting on it to exist
[15:34] <mirek2> there are lots of implied concerns that may change over time -- technologies, input devices, accessibility, etc.
[15:35] <mirek2> these don't affect the purpose, though
[15:37] <LLyaudet> ok you don't get it, "printable may be removed of the purpose" it could be "seen by an human with his eyes" the real purpose
[15:37] <mirek2> the external dependency means that, once printers are no longer used, the purpose will have to be changed to suit whatever comes after paper
[15:38] <mirek2> the word "printable" is there for a reason -- it means that there shouldn't be animations, there shouldn't be sound
[15:38] <mirek2> if everyone starts using tablets, though, there's no reason not to adapt for sound and animations
[15:38] <LLyaudet> you already said that
[15:39] <mirek2> so "seen by a human with eyes" doesn't cover it -- movies, animations, etc. can be seen by a human with eyes, but they're not suitable for paper content
[15:39] <LLyaudet> it was a metaphore
[15:41] <mirek2> sorry, I'm still not seeing your point; to me, the distinction between the actual tool and external dependencies is clear
[15:41] <LLyaudet> if the purpose of an application is for one person to takes notes easily and latter on visualize them, the tools at the beginning of the process are almost more important that the tools at the end of the process
[15:42] <LLyaudet> screen is a tool used at the beginning and at the end of the process in this example
[15:44] <LLyaudet> you can take notes with two different tools at the beggining of the process : a microphone or a keyboard
[15:44] <LLyaudet> clearly the choice between keyboard and microphone will change the purpose
[15:44] <mirek2> it depends on what your purpose is
[15:45] <LLyaudet> that's where I say distinction between purpose and UI decision is arbitrary
[15:45] <mirek2> if your purpose is "to take notes with a keyboard", then yes, once keyboards aren't sold anymore, you'll need to change the purpose of the software
[15:45] <LLyaudet> you can say in the purpose you will support keyboard and you don't do speech recognition
[15:46] <mirek2> but it's a pretty badly-defined purpose; a much better definition would be just "to take notes"
[15:46] <LLyaudet> the two applications depending on the tool you chose are totally different
[15:46] <mirek2> again, not necessarily
[15:47] <mirek2> Android allows you to input with both voice and a keyboard, the application UI for both is the same
[15:47] <LLyaudet> it's not concrete to neglect the tools, in real world the distinction is arbitrary
[15:47] <LLyaudet> no the UI is not the same, the display is the same, that's different
[15:48] <mirek2> I mean the application UI, which is the same; voice input is handled by the OS
[15:48] <LLyaudet> ???
[15:48] <LLyaudet> correct, repeat, etc. is handled by the OS
[15:49] <LLyaudet> *?
[15:49] <LLyaudet> I'm not convinced it's really efficient
[15:52] <LLyaudet> Real business world applications for text with speech recognition are quite different from writer. I don't believe it's that easy to make an application that handles correctly both inputs.
[15:52] <mirek2> well, here's how I see the distinction: you could have a project with the purpose "solve world hunger" or one with the purpose "solve world hunger using just flour"; the first seems much better, as it allows you to try and find the best solution and doesn't unnecessarily limit you, and if a new relevant technology comes along, you're able to change the way you're doing things without changing your purpose
[15:55] <mirek2> with Writer, "printable" is what sets Writer apart from, say, Impress or Notepad, in my opinion, because the point of Writer is to make mostly textual things sharable on paper
[15:57] <mirek2> however, Writer could do that either by doing what it does now or by providing a piece of hardware that reads your thoughts and produces a perfect document for you
[15:57] <LLyaudet> I'm ok with "printable" as I said I have no problem to include tools in the purpose. I just consider that input tools also define the purpose. If keyboard should be dropped then it would be no more Writer but a different application for me
[15:58] <LLyaudet> MindWriter for example ;)
[15:59] <LLyaudet> If you can read mind then maybe you can directly transfer thoughts and printing is not required anymore
[16:00] <mirek2> well, input methods change; I'd prefer to focus on the intended product, which is paper
[16:02] <mirek2> anyway...
[16:02] <LLyaudet> I'm pretty certain many text documents in writer are never printed. Outputs methods change also
[16:03] <LLyaudet> If you include outputs methods you're legitimate to include input methods in the purpose
[16:04] <mirek2> it's legitimate, but I'd prefer not to be shackled; don't worry, though -- as long as keyboards are relevant, they'll be supported
[16:04] <mirek2> that doesn't mean we should ignore touch/mouse/voice input, though
[16:05] <LLyaudet> Yes but the purpose should be focused that's what you said in your mails http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-purpose-of-Impress-td4092904.html
[16:05] <mirek2> could you cite me? not sure what you're referring to...
[16:06] <LLyaudet> Your answer to Regina :
[16:06] <LLyaudet> Yes, but it's important design practice to focus on doing one thing excellently, not on doing several things in a mediocre way. That doesn't mean Impress can't or shouldn't be used for other things, but that it should be optimized to do one thing well. Alternative use-cases can be covered unintentionally, by extensions, or by splitting the module into two.
[16:08] <mirek2> I agree there's a fine line
[16:09] <LLyaudet> Ok
[16:09] <mirek2> if you take this to the extreme, though, the focus could be only on English speakers with no health defects
[16:09] <LLyaudet> Lol yes it could. it's a matter of choice ><
[16:10] <LLyaudet> Sorry I must go away. I'll stay connected and add the chat to the wiki anyway
[16:10] <mirek2> ok
[16:10] <mirek2> are you coming back?
[16:10] <mirek2> later?
[16:14] <mirek2> another draft: "crafting a document consisting primarily of paragraphs and split into pages of fixed dimensions to be displayed statically and visually"
[16:14] <mirek2> (needs to be reworded)
[16:16] <mirek2> aside from paper, it leaves room for e-books
[16:17] <mirek2> thoughts? comments? or did everyone leave with our lengthy purpose debate?
[16:17] <jphilipz> nope not everyone left :)
[16:18] <mirek2> ok, good
[16:18] <jphilipz> but your discussion seemed over my head :)
[16:19] <mirek2> that's ok
[16:20] <mirek2> what do you think of my draft for Writer's purpose, though?
[16:20] <jphilipz> i hadnt seen it
[16:21] <jphilipz> is it somewhere on redmine?
[16:22] <mirek2> I mean the one I posted a second ago
[16:22] <mirek2> "crafting a document consisting primarily of paragraphs, split into pages of fixed dimensions, and intended to be displayed statically"
[16:22] <mirek2> (slightly reworded)
[16:24] <jphilipz> maybe 'split into pages' could be 'across multiple pages' or something like that
[16:25] <jphilipz> and 'primarily of paragraphs' could be reworded to include the variety of things that can be added to a document
[16:25] <jphilipz> some docs are simply bullet and numbering lists
[16:26] <jphilipz> wikipedia's definition of what a word processor does - "performs word processing: the composition, editing, formatting, and sometimes printing of any sort of written material."
[16:26] <mirek2> well, the purpose is about focusing on a single purpose
[16:27] <mirek2> on a single use-case, I mean
[16:28] <mirek2> some documents may not have any text at all, but the focus with Writer (and what sets it apart from e.g. Draw) is for paragraphs of text with perhaps some visual element here and there
[16:28] <mirek2> (Writer can still be used for that, it's just not the focus)
[16:30] <jphilipz> "composing a document consisting of text and images spread across fixed dimensioned pages for the intent to be read as displayed"
[16:31] <jphilipz> why i say 'text and images' is that writer's logo has text and an image :)
[16:31] <jphilipz> and most document do as well
[16:33] <mirek2> well, "primarily paragraphs" is there to focus on longer text, not e.g. DVD covers, stickers, etc. (that's closer to Draw's turf)
[16:34] <mirek2> and also to allow e.g. tables, charts, and formulas aside from just images
[16:35] <jphilipz> well text is put in tables, while charts and formulas are often inserted as images and can be considered images to most users eyes
[16:36] <jphilipz> if i had to sum up writer it would be - text and images
[16:36] <mirek2> but focus really shouldn't be on images -- that's also Draw's turf
[16:36] <jphilipz> if i had to sum up draw, it would be - vector illustration
[16:37] <mirek2> we had a lengthy discussion on that (without a clear result) -- it's rarely used for vector illustration, much more commonly used to edit PDF's and to make diagrams
[16:37] <jphilipz> Draw is for creating images, while Writer is there to embed them
[16:38] <mirek2> (it's not even suited for vector illustration -- color picking so far has been extremely difficult)
[16:38] <jphilipz> well i think of it that way, as i'm open svgs in it for QA all the time :)
[16:38] <jphilipz> but definitely its no inkscape :)
[16:39] <mirek2> anyway, I'd like to leave now -- should we end the chat?
[16:40] <mirek2> (I'm not sure whether any of the others are still here)
[16:40] <jphilipz> well i was awaiting to speak with the team about the tooltips and my proposal, if you had the time
[16:40] <mirek2> could you give me a link?
[16:41] <jphilipz> well i brought up the tooltip issue a while back and it was briefly discussed in a previous meeting - http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Improvement-of-Tooltip-Texts-tt4113640.html
[16:43] <jphilipz> with the toolbar proposal, the tooltip for inserting an image is labelled 'from file' as that is the label from the menu
[16:43] == bitigchi [~bitigchi@176.42.15.121] has joined #libreoffice-design
[16:44] <bitigchi> I guess I'm late
[16:44] <jphilipz> and the dev who i'm working with will need to tackle this issue for the insert image icon and wanted to know if the team always wants other tooltips modified for other buttons
[16:44] <mirek2> I don't have much time now, but I do want to note that changing text can be a hassle -- for translators, developers, help maintainers, etc. so please only suggest fixes if they're a significant improvement (such as in the "from file" case)
[16:44] <jphilipz> bitigchi: yep it is pretty much finished except for my few questions
[16:45] <bitigchi> aha
[16:45] <jphilipz> mirek2: okay, i'll just fix the main stuff for the proposal then
[16:45] <bitigchi> any update about purpose driven design?
[16:45] <jphilipz> alright then, i'll let you go mirek2
[16:45] <mirek2> jphilipz: alright, see you later
[16:45] <jphilipz> would be great if you guys did a google hangout
[16:46] <mirek2> bitigchi: there was a long discussion, but it didn't go anywhere
[16:46] <jphilipz> thats what the QA team does
[16:46] <jphilipz> and i think it would save time
[16:46] <mirek2> jphilipz: we don't want to force Google+ on anyone
[16:46] <bitigchi> I see
[16:46] <bitigchi> I'll check the minutes later when available
[16:46] <jphilipz> well there is also a telephone number people can call to join the conversation
[16:47] <jphilipz> so g+ isnt manditory
[16:47] <mirek2> bitigchi: btw, I just want to check that you know that the start of the chat is specified in UTC time (so you're almost 3 hours late)
[16:48] <bitigchi> yes, actually I just fell asleep on the couch..
[16:48] <mirek2> (UTC has gotten me before -- frustrating when daylight savings kick in)
[16:48] <mirek2> ok
[16:48] <mirek2> jphilipz: how does that work?
[16:48] <bitigchi> anyway
[16:48] <mirek2> does hangouts have a free dial-in feature?
[16:49] <jphilipz> there is some telephone number that individuals in various countries can call for free and it hooks into the google hangout call
[16:50] <bitigchi> I know I am late, but I just want to see, what do people think about a LibreOffice Lite
[16:50] <mirek2> is it a hangouts feature, though, or is it something TDF pays for?
[16:50] <jphilipz> the team is also trying out webrtc as that works it pretty much every browser
[16:50] <mirek2> yeah, that seems like a better solution
[16:50] <jphilipz> i think its a free service provided by a company for TDF to use
[16:51] <jphilipz> you can read more about it at - https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Meetings#QA_Calls
[16:51] <bitigchi> also it sounds like totally off-topic anyway
[16:51] <bitigchi> anyway, I'll just read the minutes :D
[16:51] <mirek2> bitigchi: honestly, I'd love it if someone took libreofficekit and made a more focused set of applications with in using GTK, but that's a monstrous project and it's hard to get devs even for relatively small changes
[16:52] <mirek2> bye guys
[16:52] <jphilipz> bye mirek2 thanks for everything
[16:52] <bitigchi> see you
[16:52] == mirek2 [56311b91@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.49.27.145] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[16:53] <jphilipz> bitigchi: watched a pages video last night an liked how they layed out the sidebar, what are your thoughts of it
[16:54] <bitigchi> well
[16:54] <bitigchi> it is neat
[16:54] <bitigchi> very neat
[16:55] <bitigchi> everything is layed out nicely
[16:55] <jphilipz> was thinking to use some of its ideas to come up with a new layout
[16:56] <jphilipz> you interested in collaborating on that :)
[16:57] <bitigchi> these days i cannot find much time due to my work schedule... also my mac is not compatible with mavericks, so no way to try it out..
[16:57] <jphilipz> so the sidebar wasnt there in the old pages
[16:57] <jphilipz> well i dont have a mac :)
[16:58] <bitigchi> i am still using pages 09, but i do not create documents with it, since it is totally proprietary
[16:59] <jphilipz> well as you said you dont have much time, i'll just bounce my mockups off you if thats okay :)
[17:00] <bitigchi>  but i'll still comment on yours, maybe i'll find the drive/wish to put my design also :)
[17:01] <bitigchi> my brain does not work unless i have wish/time to do something
[17:01] <jphilipz> :)
[18:19] == bitigchi [~bitigchi@176.42.15.121] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
    Retrieved from "https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=Design/Meetings/2014-08-31&oldid=100276"