Design/Meetings/2012-04-01

General

 * Date/Time: 2012-04-01, 1400 GMT (supposed start time)
 * Location: IRC, freenode, channel #libreoffice-design

Attendees

 * alexanderW
 * Mirek2
 * astron

Log
 (Some hellos went missing because I had to reconnect.– Astron) [14:05]  Someone cleaned up the whiteboard overview o.O [14:05]  I tried to -- just put some order into thins [14:05]  things [14:06]  the whiteboards themselves are untouched, though [14:06]  At least that's a start [14:07] look good [14:07]  What is a bit disappointing is that probably no whiteboard has been implemented yet :/ [14:07]  I've been thinking about a unified whiteboard template [14:07] ah well take a look under archive... [14:08] i attempted to archive soome thigns that arent that relevant any more about 2 mths ago [14:08] -o -gn+ng [14:09]  the problem is, though, that the whiteboards that have been implemented have started out as developer efforts, not as design whiteboards [14:09] the thing is that we should try to stay relevant to the devs. [14:10]  exactly [14:10] which means trying to see what they want changed. [14:10]  yep [14:10]  definitely [14:10] i mean the stuff where kendy pinged you about the status bar –that's great [14:10]  what I think would be great is if we had a good browseable collection of ideas [14:11]  Maybe we could ask one/some dev(s) what they would want a whiteboard to look like [14:11] ah wikis arent made with that in mind i guess [14:11]  I think we need to go the other way around -- propose something first, then see if the developers find it usable or not [14:12]  we could ask developers to look at some current whiteboards and pick out the elements that suit them and those that don't [14:12] <Mirek2> I've done something similar myself [14:12] <Mirek2> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Mirek2#My_Sandbox [14:12] <Mirek2> tried to collect items that work for me and items that don't [14:13] what do you mean with "doesnt work for you"? [14:13] or rather which specific element of those doesnt work fy? [14:14] <Mirek2> doesn't work for me when a) reading through other's whiteboards, b) collaborating on a whiteboard, c) creating a whiteboard [14:14] <Mirek2> e.g. take a look at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Styles_and_Formatting_window [14:14] oh okay. [14:15] <Mirek2> I don't understand what goals are behind that proposal, I'm not sure how to contribute, don't know what motivated the proposal in the first place [14:16] <Mirek2> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Color_Handling is much better in this respect [14:16] <Mirek2> but it still has some flaws [14:16] it was rough, yeah (when i last looked at it a week ago) [14:16] <Mirek2> e.g. not sure why there is a thoughts section when thoughts belong on the mailing list [14:17] <Mirek2> it also has a lot of text, which neither designers nor developers want to waste much time with [14:18] right, so, sometimes that lot of text is actually useful in defining what has been thought about so far. [14:18] <alexanderW> So should we try to improve the most important whiteboards at first and then contact devs? [14:18] i absolutely agree, it hurts skimmability though [14:19] <Mirek2> I'd like to work together to develop a whiteboard template that is pithy and browseable [14:19] <Mirek2> we can use https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Mirek2#My_Sandbox as a starting point [14:19] <alexanderW> sounds good [14:19] indeed [14:20] <Mirek2> take a look and tell me what's missing and what's unnecessary [14:20] <Mirek2> and what could be handled better [14:21] so i guess it should ex. summary (there), status (there), main advantages/disadvantages (not there yet) [14:21] <alexanderW> So different proposals would be displayed on that page and after deciding on one, the others would be hidden? [14:22] by the way, there already is a similar whiteboard https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/IdeaWorkflow [14:22] <Mirek2> I did mention that [14:23] o sorry [14:23] well then we should probably improve that with stuff from your sandbox. [14:24] <Mirek2> I'd link you to an archive page of the mailing list message with my take on the whiteboard, but it seems that the archive is down [14:24] <Mirek2> it's probably in your mailbox though [14:25] <Mirek2> I speicifcally avoided "Advantages" vs. "Disadvantages", because those are quite subjective (small icons might be an advantage for one, a disadvantage for another) and should be handled on the mailing list [14:26] well whiteboards always take the perspective of its author, no? [14:26] <Mirek2> a whiteboard should be used just for describing the problem and the solutions, while the mailing list should be for discussing them [14:26] <Mirek2> @astron: no, I don't think it should [14:27] <Mirek2> a good whiteboard should be objective, with enough space for anyone's proposals [14:27] doesnt lead to more chaos than good? [14:27] <Mirek2> a whiteboard's goal should be to solve a problem, not to develop a single person's idea [14:28] <Mirek2> @astron: it's part of working in a community [14:28] so, an idea always starts somewhere. and of course it should be developed collaboratively, but we do need some sort fo leadership [14:28] <Mirek2> but if you look at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Mirek2#My_Sandbox, the proposals are clearly separated [14:29] <Mirek2> @astron: basically, all proposals would root from the description of the problem and the scope [14:29] <Mirek2> all proposals then come from the scope [14:29] okay, but the problem is still subjective, then [14:30] <Mirek2> the Design lead (Christoph Noack, I believe) should take helm when there's a problem to sort out [14:30] <Mirek2> (i.e. when we can't merge the proposals together) [14:30] <Mirek2> @astron: Take a look at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Color_Handling [14:31] <Mirek2> The "Requirements" section isn't very biased [14:32] how would make that neutral? problems arent objective. and they wont be until UX is a real science [14:32] <Mirek2> Just points out the needs (based on feature plans and development restraints) [14:32] damn didnt read what you said... [14:33] but i still think the point remains valid. [14:33] <Mirek2> it does, but everything always is subjective somehow [14:34] <Mirek2> the more objective we are, the better [14:34] <Mirek2> what helps is having a clear vision defined [14:34] <Mirek2> some sort of HIG [14:34] right. [14:34] <Mirek2> which, incidentally, is another thing I wanted to talk about [14:34] great [14:35] <Mirek2> there's even an early whiteboard for it [14:35] <Mirek2> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Human_Interface_Guidelines [14:35] <Mirek2> again, it doesn't follow the idea handling template [14:36] <Mirek2> but before we move on to that topic, I'd like to finish the previous one [14:36] okay [14:36] <Mirek2> can we agree to keep all thoughts and opinions to the mailing list and have whiteboards be referential material? [14:37] <Mirek2> (i.e. used for describing, not for commenting) [14:37] basically ~yes [14:37] <alexanderW> Yes, that makes sense [14:37] <Mirek2> Is there anything on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Mirek2#My_Sandbox that I should change? [14:39] <alexanderW> I don't think so [14:39] i still maintain that (dis) advantages should be immediately glanceable [14:39] (if thats a word) [14:39] <Mirek2> but (dis)advantages seem like part of the discussion [14:39] but theyre also the motivation for even starting a proposal [14:40] <alexanderW> Maybe only the advantages that we can agree on after discussing the topic on the mailing list [14:40] <Mirek2> that's what the scope is for [14:41] <Mirek2> but proposals based on a scope will have different advantages and disadvantages themselves [14:41] <Mirek2> and that's something to handle on the mailing list [14:43] <Mirek2> or perhaps I'm not understanding what you're saying properly -- could you give me an example? [14:43] okay ... maybe then have the different proposal's d/advantages available at a glance... [14:43] <alexanderW> I think that'd be a good compromise [14:44] <Mirek2> ok [14:44] <alexanderW> Then it's obvious that those points are subjective and can be regarded as such [14:44] i guess we could use color handling as a test balloon to see if that works [14:45] its obviously a pretty hot topic, dev likes it, design likes it and we really need movement there. [14:45] <alexanderW> Yes. And add some kind of example to the sandbox [14:45] <Mirek2> adding it right now [14:45] nah, i meant modifying the original page. [14:46] <alexanderW> I meant both [14:46] oh [14:48] <Mirek2> first shot: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Mirek2#Comparison [14:49] <alexanderW> ok [14:49] that'll set the hurdle for adding a new category pretty high. [14:49] <Mirek2> what do you mean? [14:50] adding a new table row is comparatively hard. [14:50] but that wouldnt be a problem if we an exhaustive number of categories [14:51] <Mirek2> adding a column is harder than adding a row [14:51] <Mirek2> it makes sense to have proposals as columns [14:51] <Mirek2> I don't think it's very hard to add a row... [14:52] technically, no. (there is a bit of wiki markup necessary) psychologically, it will probably stop you. [14:53] (if youre not the maintainer of the whiteboard [14:53] ) [14:53] <Mirek2> really? [14:53] <alexanderW> So should we go with enumerations instead? [14:53] <Mirek2> I think tables are much easier to look through [14:54] <Mirek2> long lists can be overwhelming [14:54] i would have proposed a simple table advantages|disadvantages below every proposal [14:54] yes, long lists can be [14:55] <Mirek2> but then you don't really have the comparison [14:55] <Mirek2> some proposals may use different categories than others [14:55] <Mirek2> and it'd be hard to compare proposals because there just wouldn't be a direct comparison (you'd have to remember the data from all the tables to compare) [14:57] maybe some sort of color coding and helpful editing by the person who started the whiteboard woul help [14:57] +d [14:57] <alexanderW> Yeah, someone should take care of having a decent table [14:57] <Mirek2> what do you mean? have a maintainer for a whiteboard to make sure each proposal is structured in the same way? [14:58] yes. [14:58] we need some one who is responsible for every whiteboard [14:58] who tries to push it, who keeps it in order. [14:59] <Mirek2> what do you mean -- have one maintainer per whiteboard, or have one maintainer make sure all whiteboards are structured, or both? [14:59] <Mirek2> (I feel both are necessary.) [14:59] one maintainer/whiteboard and mentoring [15:00] (of some sort) [15:00] <Mirek2> what kind of mentoring? [15:00] thats where the "of some sort" comes into play, ie idk [15:00] <alexanderW> A person you can contact if you want to know more about the reasoning, maybe someone who should get in contact with the developers [15:01] right, someone who pings people via mail (in a friendly manner) [15:02] <Mirek2> so a person to guide the whiteboard maintainers? one to make sure that whiteboards are being maintained properly as well as provide a bridge between developers and designers? [15:03] kind of, yes [15:03] <Mirek2> why kind of? what am I missing? [15:04] nothing actually. [15:04] the problem is that theres no one full-time on design [15:04] <Mirek2> where on design? you'd like a 24/7 contact? [15:05] <Mirek2> I think it's enough if the head replies in a day or two... [15:05] not 24/7, 9 to 5 would be enough [15:06] <alexanderW> on IRC? I thought of mail? [15:06] <Mirek2> so you'd really like for there to be direct responses... [15:06] <Mirek2> theoretically, if we really wanted this, we could take shifts [15:06] <Mirek2> but I don't think the demand is there... [15:07] hm, what i mean is someone who does this professionally. [15:07] <Mirek2> (there are only a handful of us on the team) [15:08] <Mirek2> (and we're all able to follow guidelines and contact the design team/developer team mailing list when there's need) [15:08] awk for the mo [15:08] <alexanderW> afk? [15:09] no, not any more (but thats what i meant) [15:09] <alexanderW> I think it'd be enough to point to the thread and mantion who came up with the original idea [15:09] <alexanderW> *mention [15:10] ahm which thread..? (sry, didn't get that) [15:10] the thread for a whiteboard? [15:10] <alexanderW> mailing list thread [15:10] <alexanderW> on Nabble [15:11] <alexanderW> yes [15:12] <Mirek2> what do you mean? [15:12] <Mirek2> (getting a bit lost) [15:12] okay...me too [15:13] <alexanderW> A link on the whiteboard page linking to the mailing list thread on Nabble plus a mention who originally come up with the idea [15:14] to do what? [15:15] <alexanderW> allow people who are not on the design team to join the discussion. It probably won't be the case very often, but at least there is a contact given [15:15] okay, yes [15:16] <Mirek2> yeah, ok [15:18] <Mirek2> so, to summarize, we want one template for most if not all of our whiteboards, yes? [15:18] <alexanderW> yup [15:18] definitely [15:19] <alexanderW> What's up next? [15:19] <Mirek2> a HIG [15:19] <Mirek2> though it may be too early to discuss this [15:19] id love to have christoph here for that discussion [15:19] <alexanderW> we might need some more knowledge regarding VCL [15:20] <alexanderW> yes [15:20] <alexanderW> IIRC, it can rearrange UI elements based on the platform LO is used on [15:21] yes, theres some xml format that almost no dlg uses whichj can do that [15:21] <Mirek2> yeah, but that's a smaller issue [15:21] <Mirek2> of course we should always follow the platform's HIG if we can [15:22] which begs the question by how much different versions of libo should diverge [15:22] <Mirek2> what I'd like is some sort of consistency in the LibO UI [15:22] <alexanderW> I think one of the most important aspects is that we can express the HIG in very few words [15:22] <Mirek2> for example, we have several ways of sorting commands [15:22] <alexanderW> What bugs you currently the most? [15:23] <alexanderW> In Calc? [15:23] <Mirek2> one for toolbars, one for menus, one for the customize dialog, one for panes, ... [15:23] <alexanderW> ah, sorting commands [15:23] <Mirek2> and the categorization is pretty haphazard [15:23] <alexanderW> not 'sorting commands' [15:23] <alexanderW> lol [15:23] <Mirek2> or take a look at the Options dialog [15:24] <Mirek2> :) [15:25] <alexanderW> Efforts in the direction of an about:options kinda thing would be very helpful to weed out the mostly unused stuff [15:25] what is there to sort? [15:25] yes, ill hopefully be able to discuss about:config stuff with tbehrens at the hackfest [15:26] <alexanderW> great [15:26] the good news is that at least it is a gsoc proposal [15:26] <Mirek2> yeah, hopefully [15:26] <Mirek2> there are some decisions that have been made since the inception of LibreOffice that I think made the UI worse [15:27] <Mirek2> for example, the Title page dialog is pretty unusable [15:27] <Mirek2> or the new navigation toolbar [15:27] havent used the title page dlg very much. navigation toolbar is annoying [15:28] (at least preconfigured) [15:28] <Mirek2> the thing is, few people know what the dialog is actually for [15:28] im not objecting to having it in the software (although it is a bit unreliable) – but i cant see much of a point in using it. and most wont be able to either, so it should be hidden by default [15:29] most +users [15:29] <Mirek2> it shouldn't be hidden by default -- if anything, it should be an extension [15:29] <Mirek2> why bother bundling something with your software if you'll hide it afterwards... [15:30] <alexanderW> I think that dialog is useful, but it should be moed to 'insert' [15:30] <alexanderW> *moved [15:30] <Mirek2> how is it useful? [15:31] <Mirek2> does it do anything the "Page..." dialog doesn't do? [15:31] <Mirek2> we already have all the features the dialog has [15:31] <Mirek2> and they're more usable than the dialog is [15:32] right, i think the idea was to make title page creation more task oriented [15:32] (not that id know) [15:32] <Mirek2> plus the dialog has some bugs like allowing you to select to place title pages at pages that don't exist [15:32] have you reported that? [15:32] <Mirek2> and it only covers only a single page style [15:33] <Mirek2> by that reasoning, we should also have a separate "left-right pages" and "reference page" wizards [15:33] <Mirek2> which would be perfectly acceptable, but as extensions rather than features [15:33] <alexanderW> Well, I needed to have some title pages without pagenumbers in the footer and continguing on the second page with "2" [15:34] <Mirek2> I've read about it somewhere [15:34] <alexanderW> I'll just try to do so without that dialogue [15:34] <Mirek2> so I hope the person that wrote about it filed a report [15:34] <Mirek2> @alexanderW: ok, go ahead [15:35] <Mirek2> if you find it hard, then that means we need to improve the usability of page styles [15:35] <Mirek2> not that we need a wizard for everything that could be accomplished with page styles [15:35] sure [15:36] thats the root cause [15:36] we need more emphasis on usign styles [15:37] and better styles creation obviously [15:37] <Mirek2> yes, but not at the detriment of hard coding [15:37] <Mirek2> (I keep hearing that we should hide the bold and italic icons, for example, which would just be detrimental) [15:38] <Mirek2> Google Docs does it quite well [15:38] <Mirek2> http://clickortap.wordpress.com/2012/02/19/notice-google-docs-new-style-management/ [15:39] <alexanderW> Seems to work well [15:39] <Mirek2> it does, really well [15:39] <alexanderW> We need to make those styles more prominent [15:40] <Mirek2> one of the things I suggested was to have one drop-down for paragraph styles, one for character styles [15:40] <Mirek2> since both have different use cases [15:40] <Mirek2> it would also help narrow down the list of styles [15:40] <alexanderW> Which ones ore the mos [15:40] <alexanderW> t used ones? [15:40] <Mirek2> paragraph styles [15:41] <alexanderW> yes and then? [15:41] <Mirek2> character styles aren't very common [15:41] <alexanderW> I think page styles would be more useful than character styles [15:41] i wouldnt say that [15:41] <Mirek2> then page styles, I assume [15:41] <Mirek2> I think so [15:41] <alexanderW> Plus, having previews like in Google docs would be a big advantage [15:41] agree [15:41] <Mirek2> most of what you can do with character styles is easily done with hard coding [15:41] <Mirek2> agree [15:42] sure, but with character styles you can convey meaning [15:42] <Mirek2> as for making styles prominent, I suggested having colored buttons: http://clickortap.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/overflow.png [15:43] <Mirek2> Google does the same thing to emphasize buttons [15:43] <Mirek2> Gnome will too [15:43] gnome, though is currently in some sort of exploration phase [15:43] <Mirek2> @astron -- I'm not saying that character styles aren't useful, just that they're not used as frequently [15:44] <Mirek2> @astron: not at all, they've got their principles nailed down [15:44] we could add "strong" and "emphasis" buttons in place of the bold/italc buttons :) [15:44] shell is quite usable, but documents and web arent [15:45] (at least not using a mouse [15:45] ) [15:45] <Mirek2> they have them designed, just need to develop them [15:45] <Mirek2> web will get a completely tabless design [15:45] <Mirek2> which will work similarly to how shell works [15:46] <Mirek2> have an overview accessible with a keyboard shortcut or a button click [15:46] <alexanderW> Yes, haing very few character styles presented like 'bold' or 'italic' would make sense [15:46] <Mirek2> bold and italic aren't styles [15:46] <alexanderW> I know [15:47] <Mirek2> using strong and emphasis would be counter-productive [15:47] <alexanderW> but they would work the same way, or not? [15:47] i know it woudl be counterproductive [15:47] <Mirek2> well, they'd be styles [15:47] incidentally, though, that's what happened when html4 replaced html3.2 [15:47] <Mirek2> but we want users to use styles as labels, basically [15:47] <alexanderW> I meant some thing like maybe 'quote' or something similar [15:48] <Mirek2> we already have some styles like that [15:48] <alexanderW> yes, I know [15:48] in the list, yes. but a quotes button would be new [15:48] <Mirek2> one idea I had was to have a sepearate floating bar for styles: http://clickortap.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/stylebar.png [15:49] <alexanderW> But there are so many character styles, I doubt many look through the whole list but apply something similar manually [15:49] <Mirek2> with the buttons using 1-3-characters [15:49] <Mirek2> this bar would only be for "pinned" (or favorited, or whatever) styles [15:50] <alexanderW> paragraph, character or both? [15:50] <Mirek2> both [15:51] <Mirek2> we really need to clean up the bundled styles, though [15:51] absolutely [15:51] <alexanderW> indeed [15:51] <Mirek2> perhaps just have styles for headings and make it really easy to create custom styles [15:51] headings are paragraphs [15:52] (styles) [15:52] <Mirek2> yes [15:52] <alexanderW> I think at least one good style should be bundled [15:52] we don't even need all the heading styles, anything bevyond third outline level is bad anyway [15:53] <Mirek2> as I said -- heading styles should be bundled, since they're used quite frequently and since they can be used to generate a table of contents [15:53] <alexanderW> maybe we could cooperate with the guys making efforts to deliver good LibreOffice defaults with Ubuntu 12.10 [15:53] <Mirek2> @astron: I'd handle it this way -- have 10 heading levels, but only show the ones that have already been used in the document + 1 level further [15:53] oh btw cool that you startew a wiki page for that [15:54] -w+d [15:54] <Mirek2> (e.g. with a new document, you'd only see "Heading 1", once you applied that, you'd have both "Heading 1" and "Heading 2", once you applied "H2", you'd have "H3" and so on) [15:54] <alexanderW> No problem [15:55] <alexanderW> Could this cause confusion? [15:55] <Mirek2> which wiki page? [15:55] <alexanderW> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Ubuntu_Templates [15:56] <Mirek2> I don't understand why a person would need to use "Heading 2" if he hasn't used "Heading 1"... [15:56] <Mirek2> the whole point of "Heading 2" is to denote a subcategory within a "Heading 1" category [15:56] <alexanderW> Sure [15:57] <alexanderW> Makes sense [15:57] <alexanderW> I was just wondering whether this would reduce or increase confusion if those additional options pop up [15:57] whch options? [15:57] +i [15:58] dang it spelling [15:58] <Mirek2> You mean if "Heading 2" appeared once I used "Heading 1"? [15:58] <alexanderW> additional styles [15:58] <Mirek2> by "options" [15:58] <alexanderW> yes [15:58] okay. [15:58] <Mirek2> I don't think it's too confusing [15:59] <alexanderW> probably not [15:59] <Mirek2> applications have had contextual features for a long time -- Office has contextual tabs, LibreOffice has contextual toolbars, Gnome Shell has contextual workspaces, ... [15:59] don't think it's so confusing [16:00] still, we should at least limit it to 5 heading styles, because we want user to create good documents, not endlessly complicated ones [16:00] <Mirek2> btw, why "Ubuntu Templates"? Why can't we just work on application templates regardless of OS? [16:00] ubuntu want to hold some kind of template contest [16:01] <alexanderW> They will later replace the current templates in LibreOffice [16:01] http://sweetshark.livejournal.com/10155.html [16:02] sorry, you've been out of the discussion [16:02] (so far) [16:03] <Mirek2> ok, so it's not Ubuntu-only, then? [16:03] <Mirek2> why the Ubuntu label? [16:03] not really [16:03] i think they will even abstain from usign the ubuntu font [16:04] (which we dont ship upstream) [16:06] ubuntu want to ship it first [16:06] and ubuntu want their users to contribute [16:06] similar to their wallpaper contests i think [16:07] == Mirek2 [d5dcf47d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.213.220.244.125] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [16:08] <alexanderW> whoopsie [16:08] was that an accident..? [16:08] == Mirek2 [d5dcf47d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.213.220.244.125] has joined #libreoffice-design [16:08] <alexanderW> ah [16:08] <Mirek2> not sure what happened just now -- Firefox seems to have frozen up on me [16:09] okay [16:09] <Mirek2> what have I missed? [16:09] <alexanderW> nothing [16:09] so what did last see? [16:09] <Mirek2> the last message I could read is: "(so far)" [16:10] [16:03] <Mirek2> ok, so it's not Ubuntu-only, then? [16:03] <Mirek2> why the Ubuntu label? [16:03] not really [16:03] i think they will even abstain from usign the ubuntu font [16:04] (which we dont ship upstream) [16:06] ubuntu want to ship it first [16:06] and ubuntu want their users to contribute [16:06] similar to their wallpaper contests i think [16:10] <Mirek2> as for the open questions: [16:11] <Mirek2> would it be possible to have templates with both a 4:3 and a widescreen variant? [16:11] <alexanderW> thats another issue I've been thinking about for quite some time [16:11] <Mirek2> not sure I understand the necessary templates part -- wouldn't it be best to just ship with nice generic templates? [16:12] <Mirek2> the source drawings should definitely be uploaded too [16:12] <alexanderW> Currently, you can only set slideshow page sizes using either DIN or whatever standards or defined sizes in cm [16:12] we will need to coordinate to create a list of requirements [16:13] and i think there will be lots of things that will need to be improved in the templates later on. [16:13] <alexanderW> it would be nice if we one could select an aspect ratio, too. Currently, I need to detect my screen size using 'xrandr' and enter the correct data into the 'page' dialogue [16:14] <Mirek2> yeah [16:14] <Mirek2> btw, the Template and Extensions website needs some fixing up too [16:14] one of those is l10n which also includes paper sizes [16:14] @mirek2 oh it does [16:15] it so does [16:15] <alexanderW> If one could select the aspect ratio, all a template designer would need to do is provide background images with a rather high resolution [16:15] cool idea [16:15] <Mirek2> right [16:15] <Mirek2> how do master pages work in LibreOffice, btw? [16:16] <alexanderW> You can rearrange the basic elements [16:16] view > master > slide master [16:16] (if thats what you mean [16:16] ) [16:16] <alexanderW> you can move the text boxes and define how text looks like [16:16] but if you mean how they relate to styles, it seems a bit entangeld [16:17] -el+le [16:18] <alexanderW> I think editing the sample text in a master page means editing the paragraph style, right? [16:19] <Mirek2> having just checked out master pages in LibreOffice, I have to say I'm utterly confused... [16:19] <alexanderW> ouch [16:19] @alex: yes [16:21] <Mirek2> how exactly do you make a slide use the second slide from the master slide page? [16:21] fun fact: yesterday night i had to fix up a presentation (deadline looming) and needed to insert a title slide with a different master ... i didn't find out how to do that [i ended up covering the whole slide with a white rectangle and started from scratch on top of that] [16:21] <alexanderW> simply click on that second master slide [16:21] <Mirek2> nevermind, I found it -- it's the slide design button [16:22] <alexanderW> Yes, or that pane on the right [16:22] <Mirek2> I always hide the pane -- doesn't work with my netbook [16:22] still, how do i make that it is applied for a single slide only? [16:22] <Mirek2> the slide design button works that way [16:23] <alexanderW> There's a button in the toolbar that lets you select a master slide to be applied to the current slide [16:23] oh [16:23] <alexanderW> apparently, that's not too obvious :/ [16:24] yes [16:24] although the side pane has a context menu too, i just saw [16:25] ouch [16:25] <Mirek2> ouch [16:25] <Mirek2> the problem is that there are about 4 buttons concerning slide design [16:27] <alexanderW> I think the ones showing the styles could be dropped [16:27] <Mirek2> which one? [16:27] <alexanderW> And the same goes for the one allowing to add a page with a specific layout [16:27] <alexanderW> the nine squares [16:27] <alexanderW> with the hand [16:28] oh those squares represent selector buttons which represent styles [16:29] <alexanderW> ah! [16:29] in the industrial icon its still quite visible that those are buttons [16:29] <Mirek2> what use cases are there for the styles? [16:30] <alexanderW> Basically none [16:30] soemtimes you cant edit somethign usign the master page [16:30] <alexanderW> at least when I use Impress [16:30] (i think) [16:30] <alexanderW> what exactly? [16:31] Subtitle seems to not be present on the master (i think) [16:32] but do enlighten me if it is – im not using impress too often [16:33] <Mirek2> me neither, to be honest; I use Google Docs when I can :/ [16:33] traitor ;) [16:34] <alexanderW> It only seems to be used when one applies the title page layout [16:34] ah okay [16:35] <Mirek2> :) [16:35] <alexanderW> I don't know whether it's an issue, but one cannot link a certain master page to a certain layout [16:35] <alexanderW> I had issues wrappin my mind around this when I started doing templates [16:36] <Mirek2> It seems like we all agree that Impress has a lot of UI issues -- how do you propose we tackle them? [16:37] impress also has undo/redo issues. and crashing issues. [16:37] <alexanderW> Maybe first create a list on the whiteboard overview page [16:37] <Mirek2> I'd hold off on creating a whiteboard before we define the issues we want to work on [16:38] <Mirek2> we could do that here now or on the mailing list [16:38] <alexanderW> I didn't meant to create those whiteboards already, but just list the issues [16:38] currently, i think there are enough whiteboards in need of some tlc, so i dont think its too productive to start ten new ones on impress [16:39] <Mirek2> I agree [16:39] <Mirek2> how should we go about approving and implementing the new Whiteboard template? [16:40] <Mirek2> Have a rich discussion on the mailing list followed by a vote? [16:40] <alexanderW> yes [16:40] <Mirek2> Then tweak the existing whiteboards to use the same structure? [16:40] <alexanderW> and then people can voluteer to apply the template [16:40] okay [16:41] <Mirek2> ok [16:41] before we wrap this up, does anyone else plan to be at the hackfest? [16:42] <Mirek2> now that we've had a discussion about Impress, it seems like we should do something about it [16:42] <Mirek2> not me [16:42] <alexanderW> Sorry, no [16:42] okay [16:42] <Mirek2> you? [16:42] yes. [16:43] <Mirek2> who wants to put this discussion up on the wiki? [16:43] ill do. (Some off-topic parts removed. – Astron) [16:49] <alexanderW> So, are we done for today? [16:49] <Mirek2> yeah, I think so [16:49] i guess we are. [16:50] okay, then, see you next week? [16:50] <Mirek2> yes [16:50] <alexanderW> Alright [16:50] <Mirek2> have you both answered the Doodle poll? [16:50] <alexanderW> ah, not yet [16:50] i havent so far.. [16:50] <alexanderW> will do so later [16:50] <Mirek2> :D funny that you both cam [16:50] <Mirek2> came [16:51] stroke of luck [16:51] <alexanderW> probably [16:51] well, bye [16:51] <alexanderW> Have a great evening, guys [16:51] <alexanderW> bye [16:51] <Mirek2> you too [16:51] <Mirek2> bye