Design/Meetings/2012-06-10


 * Date/Time: 2012-06-10, 1600 UTC (the time below is 2 hours ahead of UTC)
 * Location: IRC, channel #libreoffice-design

Attendees

 * AlexanderW
 * Astron
 * Mirek2
 * nrundy
 * willubuntu

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: 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: (* 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]  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
 * opensymbol
 * ttf_amt (whatever those are)
 * deja vu
 * gentium
 * liberation
 * libertine
 * on the base of what the author of the document has set
 * according to peoples, eg accessibility needs