Design/Meetings/2012-12-08

Attendees

 * alexanderW
 * Astron
 * Medieval
 * mirek2
 * sfpm
 * wget

Topics

 * New personas feature
 * Icons
 * Toolbar restructuring
 * Formatting applied at cursor position
 * Page formatting toolbar

Tasks
Alex Astron Mirek2
 * Modify the icons for: Hyperlink, Sub/Superscipt, Styles, all the shapes, Table, Chart, (Help, possibly?)
 * Suggest a new look for Windows
 * Start a toolbar restructuring whiteboard
 * Send a request for a page toolbar to ux-advise

Log
[16:55] hi everyone [16:58] hello [16:59] anything new from the esc call? [17:00] ah, not really. [17:00] i was a bit uninformed, and the more important things all happened in tursdays chat [17:01] okay [17:01] albeit... theres something that didnt come up in the esc call, but that id like your opinion on: the personas/document background features. [17:02] do you like it? did you know about those? [17:02] not sure what you mean [17:02] I didn't [17:02] I suppose [17:02] please elaborate :) [17:03] me neither, until yesterday. theres a new options page that supposedly lets yo uset background images for your document and on Win theres an additional option that lets you choose a Firefox persona (=toolbar/menubar/statusbar background image). [17:04] (neither seems to work right now, though) [17:04] judging from your description alone, I think I hate it [17:05] more unnecessary complexity [17:05] btw, the options page is under libo – personalization [17:05] :( [17:05] right. i think i am in the same camp as you. [17:05] (not running an up-to-date build, sorry) [17:05] (I think I'll stick with my older build for now) [17:05] okay [17:06] so... what should we do? [17:06] you can only see the full extent on windows anyway [17:07] well, I guess we'll just relegate it to Advanced options [17:07] and that'll be the end of it [17:07] do? i have no idea. it was written by kendy, apparently and lots of people will supposedly love it – and admitttedly personalisation is something that is very harmless) [17:07] :) ok [17:08] we've had tons of useless personalisation options, but they haven't fixed any real issues [17:08] which is why the UI is still the no. 1 complaint [17:09] right, but it might solve some complaints like: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57810 [17:10] that's something to be fixed with a good default [17:11] I doubt most users would bother to use personas even if they didn't like the default look [17:11] just like they don't customize their toolbars even though they don't like the default setup [17:11] because it's just unnecessarily time-consuming/complex [17:12] that said, if the option lets you choose a Firefox persona on all platforms someday, we could simply present all the personas as extensions [17:12] == alexanderW [d4fffad5@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.250.213] has joined #libreoffice-design [17:12]  Hi [17:12] hi alex [17:12] i also like the way that personas are implemented in firefox much more than in libo (ie, the themes options panel was preexisting [17:13] hi, sorry for starting without you... [17:13] yes, I agree [17:13] (sorry if I sounded too harsh above; I'm not as opposed to it as I sound, honestly) [17:13] alex: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/87946285/libreoffice/chatlog [17:13]  where can I find the personas option? [17:14]  thx [17:14] its only on windows [17:14]  I'm on windows [17:14] but you can set document background images in tools-options-personalization [17:14] do you know if it's coming to LibreOffice? [17:15] it is in my 4.1pre build, dunno what i downloaded for windows. presumably a master build too [17:15] I meant, to other platforms [17:15] i.e. what's the reason why it's Windows-only for now? [17:15] no idea, there was a thread about that let me stumble over the feature where someone was asking the same question [17:16] http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Personas-in-LibreOffice-td4022898.html [17:16]  found it [17:17] paydirt! [17:17]  But it doesn't seem to work [17:18] paydirt? [17:18] i had the same impression in my vm [17:18] mirek2: becuase alex found it [17:18] ok [17:18] (maybe im using that wrongly) [17:19] never heard it, tbh [17:19] perhaps we should move onto icons? [17:19] okay [17:20] about the link icon: is there a reason why we don't use Gnome's? [17:20]  te one with a globe? [17:21] the one with the link [17:21] at least I think it's Gnome's [17:21] I can send a screenshot [17:21] one issue is that gnomes insert icons always have this triangle below, thats why i initially didnt want to use it [17:21] I would just get rid of this triangle [17:21] (it would be inconsistent with libreoffice) [17:21] I agree, but it's really easy to remove the triangle [17:22] yes, getting rid of the triangle would remove any of my concerns [17:22] also, I wouldn't add any insert glyph to the link icon, as it's not really insertion of any sort [17:22] i was just pressed for time a bit, so i didnt want to edit icons too much [17:22] mirek2: you can insert a link [17:23] (it has the dual-function of inserting and editing links) [17:23] yes, but that term is just historical baggage [17:23] really, the link is a property of an object [17:23] with the default being "none" [17:24] you can actually insert link text [17:24] what do you mean by link text? [17:24] (thats maybe more complicated than it has to be, but who am i to question this [17:24] ) [17:25] well, link text is the blue underlined text that appears [17:25] in markdown: (link text)[url] [17:26] okay, but the dialog is mostly used by selecting text, then linking a URL to it as a property [17:26] similar to "Interaction" in Impress [17:27] it can be used however you want to. [17:27] yes, I'm just saying we shouldn't use "insert" symbolism on the icon [17:27] (i agree, though that what you describe is more logical) [17:28]  only a chain? [17:28] yes [17:28] the Gnome one, please [17:28] I agree with Astron that the current one looks kind of KDE-ish [17:28]  okay [17:28] great :) [17:29]  Do you think it should be visible by default at all? [17:29] I would move it to the end of the formatting toolbar, to be honest [17:29]  Or lets shelve that issue for now [17:29] i have never used really used it. [17:29]  Same here [17:29] next icon: super/subscript [17:30]  I mostly insert links to websites, and for that Ctrl C & Ctrl V is enough [17:30] right [17:30]  It's similar to the one in Inkscape [17:31] I noticed you use the symbolism "a^y", which is kind of odd, given that a and y don't really have much of a relationship [17:31] a^b? [17:31] perhaps use a,a, a,b, or x,y instead? [17:31]  I think I initially used a^b and a_b [17:32]  You mentioned that I should rather use y [17:32] I actually meant that the b was too small [17:32] (I think it was formed by 1px lines) [17:33] and that you could get inspired by the Inkscape icon [17:33] sorry if there was some misunderstanding [17:33] <alexanderW> ah ok [17:33] <alexanderW> I could use a bigger b [17:33] though now I wonder how well a^b would work in Cyrillic [17:33] i guess it would be better if we stuck to the big a though [17:34] how about a^a? [17:34] that should work for Cyrillic as well [17:34] <alexanderW> an a is probably harder to recognize [17:35] <alexanderW> if we only got so many pixels [17:35] could you try it? [17:35] alex: you can make the a larger, that shouldnt be an issue [17:36] (than the y is now) [17:36] == wget [~will@109.88.220.73] has joined #libreoffice-design [17:37] <alexanderW> alright [17:37] thanks :) [17:37] next on the list: the chart icon seems a bit too large to me [17:38] at least next to the other icons [17:38] do you think it could be downsized a little? [17:39] agree. it fills the space a bit too efficiently maybe [17:40] <alexanderW> yeah, agree [17:40] <alexanderW> Having a_a looks like a bit like a font size icon [17:41] right [17:41] a, b, then? [17:42] maybe we could use greek letters for the second letter? [17:42] (subscript/superscript are often used in scientific contexts) [17:42] alpha, then? [17:43] maybe beta would be more recognisably different [17:43] a^β? [17:44] I think a^b would probably be better [17:45] I think a mix of scripts would probably confuse users [17:45] both Greek and non-Greek [17:46] why? [17:47] just because a user might think that the beta has extra significance [17:47] (from my own experience, I've seen titles of English books use Czech diacritics apparently for decoration, and it took me a long time to read what they actually said) [17:48] :) [17:48] (like "Ďíaĉřiťičš") [17:49] (it's very easy to read for people who've never used diacritics, frustrating for those that do [17:50] (or the way Borat symbolized its title -- my mind processes it as "Bordt") [17:50] its Wordt, actually [17:50] Vordt [17:50] I know [17:51] right, in english; i used german transcription [17:51] oh, right [17:51] :) [17:51] anyway... you dont seem to think people would pick up the science context? [17:51] == Medieval [c1280ada@gateway/web/freenode/ip.193.40.10.218] has joined #libreoffice-design [17:51] <Medieval> hi [17:52] hi [17:52] honestly, I don't know myself when greek letters are used in a scientific context [17:52] <alexanderW> Boolean operations on shapes don't work :| [17:52] yeah, that happens to me too sometime [17:53] have no clue what causes it [17:53] <alexanderW> now they do [17:53] how did you fix it? [17:53] do you know? [17:54] <alexanderW> try again and again and again [17:54] :) okay [17:56] when are Greek letters used in subscripts/superscripts in a scientific context? [17:56] <alexanderW> no exporting to bitmap [17:56] ... i say maths [17:57] <Medieval> haven´s seen in statistics [17:57] <alexanderW> http://www.file-upload.net/download-6902960/lc_superscript.svg.html [17:57] <alexanderW> physics [17:58] <Medieval> possibly [17:58] <alexanderW> radioactive decay [17:58] but i was not against a^b anyway [17:58] astron247: it's not all that common in math either [17:58] x^y would be more appropriate in that case [17:58] <alexanderW> wrong icon [17:58] but I'd prefer to keep the a, so I guess a^b is best [17:59] <alexanderW> http://www.file-upload.net/download-6902982/lc_superscript.svg.html [18:00] alex: can you please try fitting all your icons within 22*22? (the gnome icons are of the same size) [18:00] (and the old tango icons are too) [18:00] otherwise, i like it [18:00] <alexanderW> on a 24x24 canvas? [18:00] yes [18:02] <@sfpm> I would do it so: x_y or x^y [18:03] sfpm: we'd like to keep the "a" on the bottom for consistency with other icons [18:03] <alexanderW> we already use a for every other occurence of characters [18:03] any reason why x^y would be better? [18:03] sfpm: additionally, wed like to keep the large a, because then, alex doesnt have to recreate all the effects on it for another letter [18:03] <@sfpm> on my calculator i have x^y [18:03] sure, but this is not a math function [18:03] <@sfpm> i know [18:03] this is subscript and superscript [18:03] <@sfpm> a_x [18:04] <@sfpm> a^x? [18:04] "a" and "x" aren't really related in any way? [18:04] (except in a mathematical concept, where a would be a constant and x a variable) [18:05] -? [18:05] <@sfpm> in word 2010 there is x^2 and x_2 [18:05] well, I think that's even more confusing, given that the feature has nothing to do with calculation [18:06] <@sfpm> it has very often to do with calculations [18:07] i dont mind if we go for a^x or a^b ... but can go on? i feel were not using this time in a good way [18:07] alright :) [18:07] let's leave this up to Alex, then :) [18:07] absolutely [18:07] one more icon: Styles [18:08] it makes sense in Writer, not so much in Draw, where there are no text styles [18:08] perhaps we should get rid of the text symbol and replace it with something? [18:08] that is pretty hard [18:08] <alexanderW> A shape with a geometry triangle? [18:09] what do you mean? [18:09] oh, "A" shape [18:09] :) [18:09] yeah, I guess that'd be better [18:10] <alexanderW> okay [18:10] lastly, could you add shadow to the table icon? [18:10] there is a gnome icon, that i would have liked to use maybe... [18:10] <alexanderW> what about 'interaction' in impress [18:10] <alexanderW> ? [18:11] its icon is acceptable, and it's not a very commonly used feature [18:11] /usr/share/icons/gnome/48x48/apps/preferences-desktop-theme [18:11] == sfpm [506d3866@gateway/web/freenode/ip.80.109.56.102] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [18:11] (that was still for the styles) [18:12] I actually prefer Alex's symbolism [18:12] as styles are more like Templates, where the triangle is used as well [18:12] rather than just color choices [18:13] as the gnome theme icon looks [18:13] though I agree that the icon is more fitting for the word "Styles" [18:14] anyway, next topic? [18:14] okay. i see your point. i guess modifying it to contain a letter etc. does not make it better [18:14] right [18:15] toolbars? [18:15] id like to ask alex about why he replaced the help icon... [18:16] alex? [18:17] <alexanderW> a simpler icon, consistency with the info icon in the start center [18:18] that seems like unwanted consistency to me. and the new shape is much less recognisable [18:19] wait, i take that unwante consistency thing back [18:19] <alexanderW> IMHO a question mark is more recognizable than a swimming ring [18:19] <alexanderW> *lifebuoy [18:20] yes, but the shape is just a simple circle, whereas before it was a ring with rope around it [18:22] also, look at the bottom of the tango guidelines page: http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Theme_Guidelines [18:22] <alexanderW> hm... [18:22] I agree with Astron here, but it's not a deal-breaker for me [18:23] <alexanderW> what about the properies icon then? [18:24] document properties? or something else? [18:24] <alexanderW> the blue circle with a white character could consistently be used for met stuff [18:24] <alexanderW> *meta [18:24] <alexanderW> like properies, Information, help [18:26] ah, okay. still not sure if it is useful to lump these three things together [18:28] in this case, I'd prefer to go with the Gnome default [18:29] I wouldn't have made the connection between circle and "meta" [18:30] in any case, Alex, it's up to you [18:30] on to the next topic? [18:30] okay [18:30] <alexanderW> there isn't really a connection between both [18:31] <alexanderW> okay [18:31] <Medieval> I have one mayor question about libreoffice future [18:31] go ahead [18:32] <Medieval> Our goal is to make user interface as simple as we can? [18:33] <Medieval> And thing as easily accessable? [18:33] our goal is to make the user experience as good as possible [18:33] <Medieval> expert user or home user? [18:33] haha. [18:33] all users :) [18:34] simple has many meanings, so I can't answer that [18:34] we havent decided, imho, we should [18:34] accessible for everyone, yes [18:34] <Medieval> ms office is going direction where they put everything they can as easily accessable [18:34] <Medieval> it takes a lot of space [18:34] im not sure they will be going that direction in the future [18:35] ie, look at mso on windows phone for a very feature-stripped version of it [18:35] yeah, now they're designing a tablet UI for it, and I'm sure it's going to be ribbon-less [18:35] this leads perfectly into what I was going to talk about [18:35] which is a toolbar restructuring [18:35] <Medieval> yes [18:35] I posted a screenshot of a possible first step: https://ubuntuone.com/7kamSlZ9XJsmdrq9a4zBYh [18:35] <Medieval> thats the point why I started to talking about it [18:36] what do you (all) think about the proposal? [18:37] <Medieval> it look a lot like my libreoffice is now [18:37] what would the application menu be good for? [18:37] would it just show the rest of the menu bar? [18:38] sorry, the rest of the toolbar i mean [18:38] at first, yes [18:38] I would make some adjustments to the traditional way that's displayed, though [18:39] since by default, we show large icons, which makes the menu really hard to use with more than a few items [18:40] so I'd present this menu without icons [18:40] just like Chrome, elementary, Android, etc. do [18:40] btw: i have another criticism for the new icons – the new shapes are much too light to be usable, especially on windows (with the whitish toolbars) i guess [18:40] yeah, I'd prefer blue shapes as well [18:40] <alexanderW> tango 1 + 2? [18:41] <alexanderW> *blue [18:41] something like it, yes. [18:41] yes, just like in the arrange icons [18:41] <alexanderW> okay [18:41] right, sorry for digressing [18:41] btw, feel free to mock up another theme for windows [18:41] me? [18:41] anyone [18:41] do you mean the toolbar theme? or do you mean an icon theme? [18:42] toolbar [18:42] okay. i did that before :) [18:42] the current theme was kind of a mix between MS's pure-white Metro and the older gradient [18:43] astron247: well, to be honest, I don't think a blue gradient would fit very well under Windows 8 [18:43] gray seems more neutral [18:43] right, win8 is very different [18:43] but sure, if you think blue is better, then suggest blue [18:43] I could care less, as I'm not on Windows :) [18:44] <alexanderW> I'd keep it white-greyish [18:44] but a bit darker, I suppose [18:44] given the complaints [18:45] at least something to differentiate us from the pure white of Office 2013 :) [18:47] well, there are two things i dont like about it: [18:47] * it lacks some structure (ie like the line between menubar and toolbar) [18:47] * and the gradient rescales when you add another toolbar at the bottom, instead of simple moving down a toolbar line. at some point the gradient jsutt doesn look good any more [18:47] ^jsutt^just [18:48] would you like to propose a different design then? [18:48] okay [18:48] (or just repropose your old one?) [18:48] great :) [18:48] back to toolbars [18:49] <Medieval> (easiest way to too the kind of appmenu: http://ubuntuone.com/7eaFexPy41W6oX5v0EroZk) [18:50] I think that's a bit too complicated [18:50] I'd just keep the shown/unshown customization [18:50] <Medieval> kinda [18:51] i think at least some of things people like to do with their toolbars are now missing in your proposal [18:51] why have a nonused category? [18:51] astron247: such as? [18:51] the user could still customize the toolbar, btw [18:51] <Medieval> ok maybe not unused [18:51] printing, spellchecking, copy/pasting etc. [18:51] <Medieval> but then: resizing the toolbar easier [18:51] pasting would be in the insert/drawing toolbar at the bottom [18:52] spellchecking and printing under the cog menu [18:53] I'll upload a rough mockup of all that it would contain [18:54] (the list would be debatable, of course) [18:54] and i dont really understand why you dont want the cog menu to have icons as you wanted normal menus to have icons in them..? [18:57] https://ubuntuone.com/44LMWxAEQWhrrkhmmOPLw8 [18:57] pretend that the cog is highlighted and that the menu is split into sections [18:57] okay [18:57] astron247: a few reasons: [18:58] a) the menu system is chaotic and there are a lot of commands; the icons that appear help differentiate each menu [18:59] b) not all menu items have icons, so it's easier to pick out the more important ones, which have icons [18:59] (whereas with this menu, putting an icon next to each command is icon overkill and doesn't help much) [18:59] (actually, I think it makes it look more chaotic) [19:00] also, pretend that New is a dropdown menu [19:00] <Medieval> (and I personally prefer when main toolbar is on left, more used to) [19:01] to a): even if i pretend that there are dividers, i find your cog menu proposal still a bit chaotic [19:01] to b): i see [19:01] additionally, i am not sure if its so useful to have the normal menu bar and additionally a cog menu [19:01] well, this would just be a step toward being able to hide the menu bar [19:02] obviously, there are more steps ahead, but you have to start somewhere [19:02] (like page selection + formatting toolbar) [19:02] i know, but that does not help much. try thunderbird 17, if you want to get an impression what this feels like [19:02] <Medieval> Your proposal don+t different current state, only we can´t now change location of different buttons [19:02] <Medieval> and icons are visible now [19:04] the main reasoning behind the proposal is hiding all the clutter of the standard menubar, but still making it easy to access (and bring back) for people who use those commands [19:04] (just discovered I forgot to include "Customize..." at the bottom -- pretend that's there as well :) ) [19:05] so, printing is clutter? [19:06] it's hidden under the Chrome cog menu as well, even though it's arguably one of the most common functions in a web browser [19:07] I don't think that would be an issue, just like it isn't an issue in any of the web browsers [19:07] (btw, after making this proposal, I left my toolbar configuration in about the same state, and I kept clicking on the cog menu, expecting to get a menu, because I'm just used to it from Chrome) [19:07] (I really think it feels very comfortable to have, even though the standard menu bar is there) [19:08] mirek2: no, its one of the least common things the cool kids at google do with their browsers. for an office app, thats different [19:08] <alexanderW> so which items of the upper toolbar would be visible by default? [19:09] undo, redo, save [19:09] astron247: if you use print often, though, and don't use "Ctrl+P", you can easily add the print button back [19:10] astron247: there's a lot to print from a web browser as well: maps, e-mails, wikipedia pages, articles, ... [19:11] yet the clean UI of Chrome (navigation buttons + address bar) have proven better than IE6's feature-full toolbar: http://gallery.hd.org/_exhibits/memes/_more2004/_more10/advertising-Google-AdSense-contextual-text-ads-in-IE6-Internet-Explorer-6-browser-button-mono-DHD.png [19:12] (which is kind of what LibreOffice's standard toolbar feels like to me now) [19:12] i believe, the first ~5 chrome versions didnt even have a printing function [19:14] astron247: ...which was a major setback, but that's not really relevant to the discussion, as it can print now, and hasn't changed its UI to accomodate printing [19:14] youre right, theres a lot of places where we could reduce libo ui, but we still have to take into account that libreoffice is a content _creation_ app [19:15] astron247: it definitely is [19:15] in most cases, though, you finish a document, and then you print it [19:16] whereas you undo and save constantly while editing [19:16] just noticed: MS Office also has printing hidden under a menu by default [19:17] really? [19:17] oh, you mean the file menu? [19:17] yes [19:17] which is just as accessible as the cog menu, or LibreOffice's own file menu [19:19] so... ok to hide print under the cog menu? [19:19] with the option to bring it back to the menu, of course [19:19] by unhiding it under "Customize..." [19:21] mso also hides save, new and recent... [19:21] <Medieval> no [19:21] it doesn't hide save, undo, redo [19:21] those are under the quick access toolbar [19:21] and it does hide new, just like it is hidden under my proposal [19:22] and Recent is not on the standard LibreOffice toolbar, I believe [19:22] right, that is in the menu [19:24] so... ok to adopt the cog menu? [19:26] <alexanderW> I'm still a bit sceptical [19:27] what do you see as a potential issue? [19:27] the commands that are hidden are on par with those that MS Office hides [19:27] and the cog menu has been proven to work time and again [19:28] (Chrome, Android, elementary, Gnome, ...) [19:29] <alexanderW> Maybe it's worth a try [19:29] all these systems/apps are focused on viewing not creating, though. [19:29] <alexanderW> so the insert toolbar would need to be enabled manually? [19:29] but, still why dont you open a whiteboard [19:29] ? [19:29] astron247: all creation apps under Android use the cog menu [19:30] alexanderW: I would show it by default [19:30] <alexanderW> and would it contain more entries? [19:30] I would add "Paste", move the Insert image button to the left, perhaps add table and chart as well, and then, at the end, a button for "Insert" [19:30] which is basically the Insert toolbar inside a pop-up [19:31] (you can add it to a toolbar now, it's under "Customize...") [19:31] (but, confusingly, it looks the same as the Table button -- something to be fixed) [19:32] astron247: elementary's Scratch uses the cog menu as well [19:34] mirek2: maybe its best to open a whiteboard for that and look at it when you have finalised it a bit more [19:34] alright, sure [19:34] I'll start it [19:34] okay, do we need to discuss something else right now? [19:34] 4.0 branding? [19:35] <alexanderW> but how would this make the menus superfluous? [19:35] alexanderW: it wouldn't yet [19:35] but it's a good first step [19:35] <alexanderW> wouldn't we need to show context-sensitive toolbars [19:35] alexanderW: yes, we would [19:35] <alexanderW> like default, insert, page formatting [19:36] all insertion commands would be consolidated into the drawing toolbar [19:36] <alexanderW> could you explain what would need to be done in order to make them superfluous? [19:36] page formatting would be done through page selection [19:37] alexanderW: well, if you look at it menu by menu: [19:37] the File menu would have to be put under the cog [19:38] but they could be easily boiled down from the many we have [19:38] (especially as work on the Template manager progresses and then when we have our own file browser) [19:39] mirek2: we have a file browser now, its just incredibly ugly. [19:39] astron247: I know -- and not very useful either [19:40] but, as we were discussing in our chat with Cedric, we could derive a much better browser from the template dialog [19:41] and perhaps use it as a sort of home screen, like web apps and tablet/phone apps do [19:41] <Medieval> (I think we need concept about libreoffice future - now we are making piece by piece and don´t have main goal, trying different things aso - we need mockup maybe about main design, toolbar etc) [19:42] right [19:42] I've done something along those lines with Citrus [19:42] but it's grown to be a bit chaotic [19:43] (the website, I mean) [19:43] the ideas are basically the same as I'm proposing now [19:43] and the proposal has received pretty good feedback [19:44] <Medieval> yes, I like it too [19:44] anyway, it turns out that it's impossible to propose a large UI concept and have everyone agree to implement it [19:45] <Medieval> maybe asking community opinion? [19:45] it also turns out that if you make one such large proposal, it needs lots of details :) [19:45] each part of the concept has to be proposed individually, implemented incrementally, and checked by all the designers [19:45] so it's better to do it item by item [19:46] well, not better, it's just the only possible way [19:46] Medieval: the community will be split between "we need ribbons", "we need citrus" and "libreoffice is fine, dont change" [19:46] <Medieval> ofcourse [19:46] even if the community did agree, we would need to find developers to implement everything [19:46] <Medieval> then we need census in design team [19:47] Medieval: census? [19:47] <Medieval> (and I think there is?) [19:47] concensus? [19:47] consensus, I mean? [19:48] <Medieval> yea, consensus, sorry [19:48] well, as you can see with the cog menu proposal, there is not [19:49] though it's mostly my fault for not explaining the proposal in detail [19:49] which I hope to do soon [19:49] <Medieval> in the perspective on citrus UI I am OK with it [19:49] partly. and partly we dont really agree what vision libreoffice has... [19:49] <Medieval> (If I know wher ethe goal is) [19:49] (just provoking you) [19:50] one more topic I'd like to cover: Formatting at word cursor [19:51] we've had a conversation on the list about it once, then we forgot about it [19:51] and now it's been reposted [19:52] my proposed solution would be to change the behavior as per the e-mail [19:52] one issue here is animations, i guess [19:52] animations? [19:53] or, alternatively, change the behavior only for subscript and superscript, since, unlike, bold and other formatting options, subscript and superscript rarely apply to a whole word [19:53] well, to make the this smooth, i guess youd need some [19:53] but blah... i havent read your proposal, can you tell me the name of the thread again? [19:54] "Should formatting apply to word at cursor position or only characters typed after formatting was invoked" [19:54] I haven't actually replied with the proposal yet [19:54] but ideally, it's what I said above: have different behavior for subscript and superscript [19:56] right, i agree [19:56] sorry about my nonsensical comments before [19:57] :) that's ok [19:58] would it be ok if I asked on the ux-advise list if someone could create a page formatting toolbar [19:58] right now, it wouldn't really be useful, as it would be hidden by default [19:58] but it would become useful once we designed and implemented a way to select pages [19:59] (and it should be very simple to create a page toolbar, so it wouldn't hurt even if we decided against page selection) [19:59] why dont you do this yourself? [20:00] I don't think it's quite that simple [20:00] and I've never messed with LibreOffice toolbar code before, so I'd rather leave it up to someone experienced [20:01] if the functionality is all there, it should be just an xml file [20:01] (otherwise it would be a bit harder to do) [20:01] I think it would be a bit harder to do [20:01] okay [20:02] but all that'd be really needed for a first implementation is, say, page styles and a button for the page dialog [20:03] it'd be good to have more feature if we do implement page selection [20:03] at least if agree that page formatting commands should be more accessible [20:05] do we? [20:06] <alexanderW> yes [20:06] acting on the object itself sounds good [20:06] =direct manipulation [20:06] great :) [20:06] allright if I ask for the toolbar on ux-advise, then? [20:06] <alexanderW> I'm having dinner, so I'll be afk for a few mins [20:07] i think we should finish, actually [20:07] me too [20:08] since there were no objections, I'll send the e-mail [20:08] and I'll put up the log [20:09] thanks [20:09] you're welcome :) [20:09] see you next week [20:09] bye!