Design/Meetings/2013-01-05

Attendees

 * alexanderW
 * astron247
 * michelr
 * Mirek2
 * SteveBell

Topics

 * Template manager
 * Folder sidebar
 * Social networks
 * Icons

Tasks
Mirek2
 * Contact the website team about the Twitter feed
 * Set up a LibreOffice Design page on Facebook
 * Contact Gnome and Inkscape guys about sharing icons

Log
[16:02] hello [16:04] hi [16:11] ok, let's get started [16:11] cool [16:12] well, on the branding front, there are no proposals [16:12] too bad. [16:12] yeah [16:13] it's something that would be good to have before UI freeze [16:13] == alexanderW [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has joined #libreoffice-design [16:13] hi alex [16:13]  Hi [16:13] hi [16:13]  Did you already start? [16:13] yes, sort of [16:13] a little [16:13] I just said there are no new branding proposals [16:14]  right [16:14] so who knows if we'll have new branding for 4.0 [16:14] we'll see... [16:14] it should hopefully be possible to get new branding in after the UI freeze [16:14] so we still have some time [16:15] (about a month) [16:15] == medieval [c332e536@gateway/web/freenode/ip.195.50.229.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [16:15] it's a bit different with the template dialog [16:15] I've been pretty busy, and I haven't build LibreOffice yet [16:15] ok... [16:15] so I haven't actually tried it yet [16:16] you mean since last week? [16:16] yup [16:16] in any case, I think we should have a chat with Cédric ASAP and try to get the worst bugs fixed [16:17] I don't know if the plan is to get the dialog into 4.0 anymore -- is it? [16:17]  Are UI bugs still fixable for the 4.0? [16:17] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/4.0 seems like it [16:18] but we have to move fast [16:18]  indeed [16:18] so... IRC chat with Cédric? [16:19] maybe tomorrow? [16:19]  I'd be available [16:20] astron? [16:20] should be possible, but do you think cedric will like that date? [16:21] don't know [16:22] would you propose a different time, maybe during the week? [16:23] i think i could be available on monday too [16:23] (afternoon) [16:23] ok [16:23] alex, how about you? [16:23] after that, im not sure, when id be available again ... maybe thursday or friday [16:24] ok [16:25] alexanderW: do you have some free time on Monday? [16:26]  I'm not sure yet [16:26]  probably not [16:26] alright [16:26] so I'll e-mail Cédric if he could have a chat with us tomorrow, and, if not, to just tell us when he's free [16:26] sound good? [16:27]  yea [16:27]  *h [16:27] ok [16:28] about icons: do you think the new icons are ready to ship with 4.0? [16:28] also, is it ok to ship the new icons when we don't have their smaller counterparts ready? [16:28] i dont like that last idea. [16:28] e-mailing Cédric? [16:29] no: mirek2: also, is it ok to ship the new icons when we don't have their smaller counterparts ready? [16:29] so you're saying you wouldn't ship them until the counterparts are ready [16:29] in which case we most certainly wouldn't be able to ship them in 4.0 [16:29]  Having Tango as default, but shipping tango_improved, too? [16:30] yeah, maybe [16:31] if we call it something like "Tango Improved (large icon-only)" [16:31] o please not. [16:31] so not ship them at all, then? [16:31] otherwise well end up with twenty different tango themes, each of which only half-done [16:32] there would only be 2, and just for a little while [16:32] astron247: what would you propose, then? [16:33] no change in icons at all? [16:33] well, do we have small counterparts for at least part of the new icons? [16:33] (to be frank, now that I look at them again, the old ones look ghastly) [16:33] astron247: well, we have counterparts for those that are already part of the Gnome icon pack [16:34] the smaller icon size is 16x16, right? [16:34] right, but we can't really enable a half-done text formatting set [16:34] mirek2: yes, 16*16 [16:35] I'm wondering: how hard would it be to make the shape icons 16x16? [16:36]  especially the symbols etc are tedious [16:37] btw, why is the gnome-icon-theme folder in the git repository? [16:37] in which git repository? [16:37]  is it? [16:38]  there's a superfluous zip file that I need to remove [16:39] oh, nevermind [16:39] I suppose I somehow accidentally copied it in :) [16:41] I know making the icons had to have been painful, but I'm thinking transforming the icons into 16x16 counterparts might be mosty just a question of moving the nodes [16:41] (probably not in all cases, but hopefully in most) [16:41]  If there were 24*24 versions for everything already [16:42] which shapes are missing? [16:42] quite a few of the symbol shapes it seems [16:43] ok, so I suppose no new icon set for now [16:44]  we could still use the rest of them [16:45] astron, would you be ok with that? [16:45] what rest do you mean? [16:45] I still think bundling the new icon set would probably be the best solution [16:45] <alexanderW> everything except for shapes [16:47] not sure ... we still dont have the small icons then... [16:50] hm... I'm thinking whether we might not want to collaborate with the Gnome team [16:51] to broaden their icon set [16:51] so that all the Gnome applications can use it [16:51] and so that more people would work on the icons [16:52] <alexanderW> that would also require a lot of work on the icon naming [16:52] i dont know if the gnome tango set is still a priority at upstream gnome. [16:52] <alexanderW> WHy? [16:52] <alexanderW> *Why [16:54] if youre asking me... i think that all the new apps are supposedly so simplistic that they can use a monochrome set [16:54] astron247: I think that only applies to non-creative apps [16:55] maybe. but the gnome people currently dont work on any creative apps (besides, there is a mnonochrome inkscape set, too) [16:55] gedit seeems like it will always use a non-monochrome set [16:56] <alexanderW> Hm, gtk3 inkscape also has a monochrome set, but I don't know whether it'll be used by default [16:56] but gedit is not part of the core gnome 3 apps [16:56] == SteveBell [~Adium@mnhm-5f74f1ad.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #libreoffice-design [16:56] <alexanderW> Hi [16:56] <SteveBell> hi [16:56] hello [16:56] well, in any case, there's no harm in asking the Gnome people for help [16:57] about licensing: I'm thinking why not have all the icons CC-licensed [16:57] otherwise, there'll be a licensing mess [16:57] (especially as a lot of the new icons are derived from the CC-licensed Gnome icons) [16:58] <SteveBell> have you guys started already, or is that due in 2 mins? [16:58] and as for icon naming -- that's something that we've been hoping to work on in a while [16:58] in that case, we cant but license them as CC [16:58] SteveBell: we've actually started an hour ago [16:58] <SteveBell> ah damn them times zones [16:59] steve: bit me a few times too. [16:59] <alexanderW> happens to us from time to time, too [16:59] <SteveBell> so sat 17h german time (GMT+1 I think) is correct? [16:59] == michelr [~michel@mir31-7-78-242-216-54.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #libreoffice-design [16:59] <alexanderW> yes [16:59] <SteveBell> :S [16:59] <SteveBell> are you done or is the meeting still running? [16:59] Hi ! [16:59] it's still running [16:59] <alexanderW> Hi [16:59] hello [17:00] i'm late and i'll available for less than 1 hour... [17:01] here's the log up till now: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Meetings/2012-01-05 [17:01] <SteveBell> ok, do you have an agenda or pad somewhere besides http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/IRC-chat-td4027356.html ah thx [17:02] <alexanderW> Not really [17:02] steve: we use 1600 utc, that will be either 1700 or 1800 in german time, depending on dst. [17:02] <SteveBell> about the branding for 4.0, how about pushing that a little on your communication channels? a new splash screen wouldn't hurt imo [17:03] SteveBell: we posted about it on the mailing list [17:03] what do you mean by pushing? [17:03] I'll make a G+ post as well, if nobody minds [17:04] <SteveBell> I mean getting in touch with your user base. ML is fine, but most users won't be subscribed. by pushing I mean, give LO a voice on diaspora / identi.ca and let a broad audience know, that the field is open for contributions. [17:04] <SteveBell> yes, G+ sounds like a good idea too [17:05] <SteveBell> consider connecting G+ and other social media so you don't have to post 4 times [17:06] we don't actually have any other social media outlets [17:06] <SteveBell> is twitter working? I only see an empty stream on the german LO page [17:06] we only have a LibreOffice Design Google+ page [17:07] but I could definitely see us expanding to Diaspora [17:07] however, not having used Diaspora in a while, I: [17:07] steve: none of us an post directly to the libreoffice official pages [17:07] <SteveBell> why not create them? brdcst.it let's you connect feeds rather easily. (not meaning to boost the design meeting into OT discussions, but imo using that is Sooooo important, if you wonder why no contributions to new splash screens were made, that might be one reason) [17:08] well, there's the issue of comments, really [17:08] since none of us use the other channels, there'll be nobody to read the comments on these channels [17:08] sure, but the issue is that if you provide an empty sheel of a social networking page, people will notice [17:08] (what mirek said) [17:09] sheel=shell [17:09] that said, I can certainly see us taking up one or two more social media sites [17:10] is there one you would recommend over the others? [17:11] <SteveBell> hm, sure. but for contact reasons you could simply put up your team mail address up. also just add the info, that the info is only a copy from XY to have LO represented on that other social media platform. e.g. I have several feeds that I read on diaspora. some of them are inofficial mirrors. but I'm thankful for them, since then I can consume those news. it helps users switching from facebook and twitter. and many users (espe [17:11] <SteveBell> well diaspora and identi.ca seem to be the most important ones to me. [17:11] <SteveBell> do you already have twitter? [17:12] no, not yet [17:12] <SteveBell> to give you an idea: https://diasp.eu/people/d443b29708531c79 is an unofficial mirror of http://blog.fefe.de [17:13] <SteveBell> mirek2 are we now talking LO design department or LO in general btw? [17:13] we were originally against twitter because there's a word limit (not sure how that works when you're reposting stuff from other networks) and because there was no data export (but, apparently, that's coming, or maybe it's already come) [17:13] SteveBell: just design [17:14] <SteveBell> aha. well the official twitter looks broken on here: http://de.libreoffice.org or am I blocking something in my browser? (I extensively block stuff) [17:14] <alexanderW> Nothing visible here either [17:14] <SteveBell> for the design department yet again, there's maybe more people like me, that are enthusiastic LO users and interested in the way it's heading. I can't code nor can I offer any design skills, yet I might be abel to contribute. [17:15] <alexanderW> Maybe the last tweet was quite some time ago? [17:15] <SteveBell> ok, should we let the LO headquarters know, that their german site as well as their main site http://www.libreoffice.org is not showing their twitter feed? [17:15] <SteveBell> no reason not to display it, no? [17:16] SteveBell: I would use the website mailing list [17:16] <SteveBell> any volunteer to do that? I'm currently not subscribed. [17:16] <SteveBell> holy moly. last tweet 16th july ??? https://twitter.com/libreofficenews [17:16] me neither [17:16] anyone subscribed? [17:19] since nobody seems to be, I'll take care of it [17:19] <SteveBell> hm, isn't there a simpler way to get in touch? why not mail someone directly? anybody happening to know who has twitter access. sounds good. thx mirek2 [17:19] <alexanderW> thanks [17:20] SteveBell: when you say, "might be able to contribute", what kind of contribution do you mean? [17:20] also, if you speak German, perhaps you might want to help translate German comments in the code? [17:21] or would you like to help us manage different social media accounts? [17:21] <SteveBell> well here I am chatting with you guys how to improve your mind-share amongst your users and getting more people to contribute to LO. [17:22] <SteveBell> time is limited. I speak german so translations would be possible. but again, I'd rather focus on helping you spread the word. (although that might sound somewhat stupid) [17:22] <SteveBell> what system are you using for translations? [17:23] hehe. no. this is actually about translations of source code comments [17:23] (so no system, just people translating things and creating patches) [17:24] well, there is a localization team: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-involved/localizers/ [17:24] they use Pootle [17:25] <SteveBell> how would that be done? only in the source code? my question is hinting at the fact that more people might be contributing to your l10n when you use sth like transifex. ah ok pootle looks nice. and german looks rather complete, no? [17:25] yes, except for askbot [17:26] steve: yes, the source code comments are only in the source code, not in pootle. the software l10n is done in pootle [17:26] also, if you look around the new strings, therell inevitably be things you find that are incorrect. [17:27] <SteveBell> hm, then I'd rather suggest to increase your social media presence and ask there for contributors. astron247 can't the source code comments be added to pootle as well? I'm not sure I understand where the difference is. maybe that is a feature request for pootle? [17:27] about improving mind-share: I'm not sure whether an account on any of the lesser-used social networks might be worth the time invested into them [17:27] Twitter might be worth it [17:27] <SteveBell> sure. well, I can put that on my sometimes maybe list. (going over the german translations) [17:28] ok, great :) [17:28] steve: adding the source code comments to pootle would be possible, i guess, but at the same time, sometimes it helps to see the code around a comment to decide what the appropriate terminology is [17:28] I'm wondering whether Facebook might not be worth it as well [17:28] <SteveBell> astron247 agreed. [17:29] even though Facebook is not the most open of social networks, it is the most-used [17:29] and might get us more contributors than Google+ has [17:30] what do others think: is Facebook worth it? [17:30] im not so sure about that, because less technical contributions will most likely not contribute at all. [17:31] of course, g+ really doesnt have much of an audience, so might be worth a try. [17:31] <SteveBell> mirek2: about the social networks: this is how I see it: you create good blog posts, but you don't forward that info to the brought audience. who goes to the LO main page? most times that is users that are already aware of LO. if you want to gain more mindshare use hashtags etc to get into the audiences that care about FOSS or establish the #LO hashtag on identica yourself. [17:31] <SteveBell> (ah sry I was talking LO headquarters again). but still even if it's only the design section, why not forward and link 2-3 networks? [17:32] because we don't have the manpower to manage these networks [17:32] <SteveBell> I'd be willing to help set that up. mirek2 maybe we could do that together since some testing is needed anyways until everything works [17:32] and not being receptive to our audience is not a good thing [17:33] <SteveBell> if they are setup correctly it shouldn't need more manpower than maintaining a single network [17:33] <SteveBell> channeling support to another location is not being unreceptive. [17:33] is there a way to collect comments from various network in one place? or a way to disable comments on additional networks? [17:33] SteveBell: no, but not answering user questions is [17:34] <SteveBell> hmm. you've got a point there. disabeling comments won't be possible. [17:35] difficult for me to give advices on those subjects : no fb, no twitter, really not used to that. [17:35] right, steve, if youre willing to make libo design page on facebook and maintain, that'd be great. [17:35] +it [17:36] <SteveBell> but with a clear message in the profile I don't think that is a real problem. also: if the LO headquarter did not post a single tweet in 6 months, well if you'd go though the networks every 2 months would be in comparison rather active. if they don't tweet I don't think the headquarter answered ANY comments in the last half year [17:36] <SteveBell> hehe, facebook is the worst of all social networks. [17:36] yeah, but it's the most populated [17:36] <SteveBell> I think the only answer to facebook is to not use it. and I have no facebook experience whatsoever. I use the other networks though [17:37] ill be afk... [17:37] well, I could set up the Facebook page [17:38] I think it'd be good to have some presence there [17:38] <SteveBell> hm… why not start one step at a time? e.g. add diaspora and connect diaspora and G+. yes, I'm not keen on facebook, but representing FOSS on there might not be the worst idea. [17:38] as for diaspora: I remember using it and it being a mess [17:38] <SteveBell> when was that? [17:38] mostly because I was subscribed to a hash-tag [17:38] <alexanderW> Someone would need to take tare f that site regularly [17:39] <alexanderW> *care *of *facebook site [17:39] SteveBell: would you like to take care of the diaspora site? [17:39] alexanderW: I could do that [17:39] <SteveBell> yes. [17:40] you know that it would be LibreOffice Design only? [17:40] <alexanderW> Otherwise it would probably end up like the libreoffice.org page [17:40] <alexanderW> on facebook [17:40] (if you'd like a generic LibreOffice page, you'd probably need to ask the website or marketing team) [17:41] btw, does Diaspora have anything akin to Google+/Facebook pages? [17:41] or are projects treated like people? [17:42] <alexanderW> No idea [17:42] <SteveBell> argh! diaspora only allows facebook / twitter / tumbler connection. no G+ in sight. [17:42] <SteveBell> this is what brdcst.it allows handleing: http://cl.ly/image/0A1f2s0w333G [17:42] <SteveBell> diaspora has nothing like facebook pages. [17:42] ok [17:43] well, it's up to you: if you'd like to maintain a LibreOffice Design account on Diaspora, feel free to [17:43] Why are you focusing on diaspora ? isn't it stopped ? [17:44] michelr: no, it's not stopped [17:44] <alexanderW> Lead by the community, I believe [17:44] yup [17:44] maybe, but nearly no audience [17:45] as long as someone's willing to maintain it, it's ok [17:46] <SteveBell> mirek2 why not take 1 step after the other? maybe we could start with setting up facebook and trying to connect taht to the existing G+. once that is working fine we can extend later? [17:46] sure, ok [17:47] <SteveBell> again, I'd be willing to contribute to the setup. we somehow need to deal with the account access. but we could share an account for the setup process and later you can change the PW. [17:48] well, I've read about some ways to connect accounts, and it's something I'll need to learn later anyway, so I'll try it myself, if you don't mind [17:48] but I can turn to you if I get lost and need help [17:49] <SteveBell> sure. [17:49] great, thanks :) [17:49] if it's ok, I'd like to return back to the topic of our icon set [17:49] is it ok if I contact the Gnome and Inkscape guys and check whether we all want to share icons under the CC attribution share-alike license? [17:50] <SteveBell> hehe, yes and sry for hijacking your conversation. [17:50] :) that's fine, glad you did [17:50] <alexanderW> Yes, go ahead [17:51] ok [17:51] also, about the icons we currently have: [17:52] a) the new link icon uses a globe, and it's not part of actions in the gnome-icon-theme [17:52] could we use the chain icon from gnome-icon-theme instead, just without the triangle symbol? [17:53] <alexanderW> I think that's the one I currently use in the theme [17:55] hm, I pulled today and I still get the globe with a cursor icon [17:56] <alexanderW> Maybe I used the wrong name [17:56] <alexanderW> But I think it worked for me [17:56] sc_inserthyperlink.png in tango_testing? [17:57] <alexanderW> lc [17:57] <alexanderW> not sure about sc [17:59] what do you mean by lc? [18:00] <alexanderW> lc_inserthyperlink [18:03] oh, ok, you're right that there is lc_hyperlinkdialog [18:03] please change sc_inserthyperlink as well, though [18:04] also, could you try using the Gnome image icon? [18:05] I know I mentioned it last week, but I really think it would help us going into the future [18:05] because we'd have all the sizes that the Gnome team produces [18:05] we'd have a much smaller SVG file [18:07] == astron247 [~frootzowr@dslb-088-072-040-056.pools.arcor-ip.net] has quit [Quit: astron247] [18:07] and the icon is completely vectorized, which might be an important thing for displays with high pixel densities in the future [18:07] <alexanderW> I thought I had already committed that [18:08] <alexanderW> I'll check it later [18:08] hm, I'm looking at lc_graphic.png [18:09] and sc_insertgraphic.png [18:09] ok [18:09] thanks [18:09] hm, anything else to talk about? [18:10] <alexanderW> I guess not [18:11] ok, then [18:11] template manager ? [18:11] what about it? [18:11] <alexanderW> We'll have to discuss that with Cédric [18:11] michelr: if you have anything to say about it, please do [18:12] thx, I tested it and found it not very easy [18:12] i have a proposal, based on the current lo extension website [18:12] could you give us the specifics? [18:13] - the tabs are not ok (it's not the std ui to perform filter) [18:13] - the search icon is too "complicated" : just replace it by the search textfield [18:13] - always show the path and insert a ">" between parts [18:13] - why is the base of path always "All templates" --> confusing with "All" tab [18:13] - when you're in a folder, there is no button 'import', but when ou select a folder from the base path, there is the 'import' button ! [18:14] I'm currently finishing a mockup, i'll upload asap (few hours) [18:14] == astron247 [~frootzowr@dslb-088-072-040-056.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #libreoffice-design [18:14] <SteveBell> will that mockup show up in the nabble forum? [18:15] <SteveBell> speaking of icons: I'm sure you've already discussed the mockups by Mariano? http://www.iloveubuntu.net/creative-developer-releases-updated-interesting-libreoffice-ui-mockup Are you aware he showed up on the mailing lists and seems willing to contribute? [18:15] I'll upload it in the wiki [18:15] yes. [18:15] it doesnt have much to do with the icons though. [18:17] <SteveBell> are you guys in touch with him? astron247 why not? what he uses for font style and alignment looks nice. can't that be made into icons? or am I misunderstanding sth here? [18:17] SteveBell: the icons are actually part of the Faenza icon set [18:18] sure, we know hes there... but getting in touch with him is a little difficult, because his english is so broken. [18:18] http://www.webupd8.org/2011/07/faenza-icons-for-libreoffice-toolbar.html [18:19] <SteveBell> ok, and the default icon set shouldn't be changed? imo it looks a bit dated. but being a noob maybe I just should use the Faenza icon set? [18:19] SteveBell: we're working on updating the icon set [18:19] steve: libreoffice has too many icons to just swtich [18:19] <SteveBell> ok could I use those icons on a mac as well?!? [18:19] right, trying to update the tango icons [18:20] we're basing this icon set on the Gnome icon set, though [18:20] steve: what icons do you want to use on mac? [18:20] astron247: Faenza icons, I presume [18:20] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Michelr#Idea_for_Template_Manager [18:20] <SteveBell> sorry I'm loosing track. yes mirek2 [18:21] <SteveBell> what's his native language? his works looks rather convincing. http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-Libraries-VCL-td4025069.html [18:21] <SteveBell> maybe there's a person speaking his language on the LO team? [18:22] his name sounds vaguely portuguese ... but idk [18:23] <alexanderW> He's from argentinio [18:23] at the same time, his mockups are basically ribbons, but backwards... which does not make so much sense to me [18:23] <alexanderW> *a [18:23] michelr: hm, I'm not sure we want to make such wide-ranging changes to the dialog [18:24] frankly, I don't see that much of a need for a sidebar [18:24] <SteveBell> maybe a polite answer asking for more info about his current problem and thanking him for his contribution might lead to a useful discussion? [18:24] <SteveBell> (since he showed up on nabble) [18:25] from a technical pov, it might simpler to code [18:25] and much more coherent with different sources of templates [18:26] michelr: let's let the other topic come to a conclustion, talk about it afterwards [18:26] ok [18:27] <SteveBell> can I use Faenza on OS X? all I find on the web are how-tos for linux... [18:28] i think you have to modify the app bundle for that, but yes, it should be possible as well [18:28] (but i dont have mac os [18:28] ) [18:29] <SteveBell> probably not for a noob like me then... [18:30] <alexanderW> can you unarchive the .app? [18:30] <SteveBell> I think so. I can open the content of the dmg [18:30] i think michel uses a a mac, amybe he can help [18:30] ? [18:30] <alexanderW> I guess there should be the same folders as in /usr/share/libreoffice [18:31] <alexanderW> Do you see a share/config folder structure? [18:33] <SteveBell> first off I don't see a libreoffice folder in /usr/share/ but you want me to look in the downloaded dmg right? [18:33] <alexanderW> Yea [18:34] <alexanderW> no, wait [18:34] no, you have to look in the installed whatever in /Apps [18:34] <SteveBell> I'm re-downloading. might take 2 mins. don't let that stop your meeting btw… ah ok. [18:34] (i think, but really, i know macs from the store, so its probably not a wise idea if either of us tries to help here [18:34] ) [18:34] can we get on with the icons then? [18:35] for mac there is only a single file : lo.app : do a right clic on it and select "open package" [18:35] <SteveBell> I'm there already [18:35] or something equiv : then you have std folders [18:35] <alexanderW> What's the content of the .app? [18:36] a .app is a folder ; the finder is using it as a file [18:36] <SteveBell> http://cl.ly/image/2m2L3z251I1B [18:37] <alexanderW> the icons should be zipped files in the subfolder config [18:38] <SteveBell> yes. images_tango.zip images_oxygen.zip and so forth [18:39] <alexanderW> If you got a new icon set you need to copy the icons into one of those folders [18:40] <SteveBell> so 0.3a is what I want? http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?action=content&content=143474 [18:40] <alexanderW> astron247: yes [18:42] okay, where did you stop? [18:42] we were talking about the template dialog, actually [18:43] oh, then. [18:43] michel posted a proposal: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Michelr#Idea_for_Template_Manager [18:43] I just drafted it in few minutes [18:44] so it needs polishing [18:44] okay, what would the categories be? (like folders or like types or sth else?) [18:45] == alexanderW [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [18:45] for local repo, they are the folders [18:45] for online, they are the existing categories [18:45] == alexanderW2 [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has joined #libreoffice-design [18:45] so there would be no folders within the template grid? [18:45] and we can imagine devs might use actegories also for local repo [18:45] the online repos are using folders too, iirc [18:45] <alexanderW2> I'll be afk for some mins [18:46] okk [18:46] ok [18:46] (even multiple hierarchical levels deep ones) [18:46] online, there is only "categories", no use of "folder" [18:47] and i find it much easier to use [18:47] there is always the complete list of templates, the user just filter it [18:47] sure, but other repositories will use folders [18:48] so we can have hierarchical categories [18:48] michel: if by online, you templates.libreoffice.org, then yes, but even this will be presented as folders presumably [18:48] (not sure) [18:49] I'm currently connected on http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center and there is no folders [18:49] categories are used as single tag [18:50] yes, but the presentation will be different, since libo doesnt bundle a browser [18:51] and our current presentation form is folders [18:51] (its the only thing thats implemented) [18:51] (afaik) [18:52] the current implementation form is a grid (of folders or templates) which is ok [18:53] what i found difficult with the current template manager was that i had to always change of folder to see templates [18:53] no easy way to list all templates [18:53] right. [18:53] online, that is apparently impossible though [18:53] and we can suppose users may have lass than 100 templates [18:53] µless [18:54] *less [18:54] so we can focus on the complete list (without folders) and add simples filters [18:54] if only there were no developers [18:55] we could [18:55] well, that's just my feed-back ;-) [18:55] and I really think my proposal is easier to code [18:55] but apparently, it is impossible to find find all templates of an online repo at once [18:56] it is impossible to enforce single-depth repository structures for online repos. [18:56] too [18:56] so, we need the path bar... [18:57] list of all templates is the default view of http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center [18:57] sure, but we are using the cmis backend of the site, not the http one, so no idea what we get [18:58] oh I see [18:59] http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Template-manager-feedback-td4024102.html [18:59] hmm, if the http server can provide the complete list, it means it's possible... ;-) [18:59] more specifically, http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Template-manager-feedback-td4024102.html#d1355909845000-291 [19:00] afk again [19:05] breaking the silence -- what does the "Name" field serve as? [19:05] is it a search field? [19:06] I mean the one next to the type drop-down [19:07] yes, it's a search field ; the corresponding line contains filters [19:08] also, what don't you like about the module tabs? [19:09] just that tabs are not a UI to perform filters [19:09] these aren't really filters [19:09] there are popups for that [19:10] imho, they act like filters [19:10] they serve the same function as they do in any other dialog [19:11] they separate out the different categories [19:11] (we really ought to get rid of the "All" category, though) [19:12] iWork and Office separate templates by type as well [19:12] <alexanderW2> back [19:12] (they go a step further and have a separate application for each type) [19:13] (on Windows and Linux, it seems like we do as well) [19:14] i'm testing on windows... [19:15] I didn't mean with regards to the template dialog [19:15] == astron247 [~frootzowr@dslb-088-072-040-056.pools.arcor-ip.net] has quit [Quit: astron247] [19:15] I just meant that each module is presented as a separate application on Windows and Linux [19:19] can't find template dialog on MSO2007 :-/ [19:19] <alexanderW2> So in this aspect our UX is already better :) [19:20] :) [19:20] here's what the MSO 2010 one looks like: http://cloud.addictivetips.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/image.jpg [19:21] quite similar to ours [19:21] and it seems like when you're in Word, it only shows Word templates [19:21] so it's also separated by filetype [19:23] got it !... [19:23] <alexanderW2> SO it doesn't allow one to collect school-related templates in one folder [19:23] <alexanderW2> like slideshows and essays [19:23] interesting point [19:24] about the performance problems, i'm quite surprised : [19:25] alexanderW2: that's not really a disadvantage, given that, when you want to start working on something, you know whether it'll be a presentation or a document [19:25] listing 100 or 200 items may not take "minutes to hours" [19:26] <alexanderW2> Yeah we should decide what's matters more, easier UX or the ability to combine different filetypes in one folder [19:26] alexanderW2: easier UX [19:26] let's not forget that currently there is not a menu "manage template" [19:27] honestly, even file managers are starting to separate out items by file types [19:27] so it might be interesting to see all types [19:27] and, from my own experience, it's a good organizational strategy [19:27] michelr: what do you imagine under a "manage template" menu? [19:28] the template dialog that allows to manage all templates (move, organize...) whatever the type or anaything [19:29] *anything [19:29] without working in writer, calc or.. [19:30] in current LO (3.x), there is that menu ; but the associated dialog is not powerful [19:30] == alexanderW3 [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has joined #libreoffice-design [19:32] michelr: that's what the tabs are for [19:32] == alexanderW3 [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has quit [Client Quit] [19:32] == alexanderW2 [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [19:33] if the "All" tab is removed, it might be more coherent [19:33] having the filetype-related tabs allows you to have the same dialog regardless of what module you're in, or whether you're in a module at all [19:33] == alexanderW [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has joined #libreoffice-design [19:33] michelr: I agree -- it'd be good to remove the "All" tab [19:34] my proposal works also whatever the module you're in : just force the popup "type" or not [19:35] sure -- I'm not arguing that it doesn't [19:35] ;-) [19:35] to be honest, though, I'm not too comfortable with the idea of categories instead of folders [19:36] how do you propose categories would work, btw? [19:37] just like the website ! [19:37] would the dialog show templates from all categories by default? [19:37] afk for a phone call [19:37] ok [19:39] back [19:41] show all categories by default ? why not if not performance pb [19:41] * if no [19:42] well, as Astron explained, we can't show all the categories by default [19:42] how is it done in the website ? [19:43] <SteveBell> I also think "show all" can be overwhelming. and categories should help looking for the right template. [19:43] michelr: no clue [19:43] <SteveBell> although, wow that is *a lot* of categories... [19:44] <SteveBell> hm, and e.g. the music category only has one template. if that is true for more categories show all might not be such a stupid idea after all... [19:44] in any case, I just think folders are a superior organization technique to categories [19:44] so it might be annoying to recursively "walk" into each folder/subfolder [19:45] i don't agree [19:45] specially for low numbers items [19:45] <SteveBell> me neither. what's the benefit of folders above categories? [19:45] the original idea was to allow only one folder hierarchy [19:45] <SteveBell> that you can use nested folders? [19:45] and to use folders sparsely [19:46] <SteveBell> hm, maybe it might be a good idea to get an overview of how many templates will be included and which categories are covered. will that be identical to the webpage? [19:47] by default, only a few templates will be included [19:48] and i suppose users don't create much templates [19:48] as I'm not running the latest build, I'm not sure how the official online repository is managed [19:48] <SteveBell> not that many meaning? 20? 50? 100? [19:48] currently, the website says "119 templates" [19:48] the offline templates? afaik, only around 10 in Impress [19:49] <SteveBell> so now we are discussing how online templates (in the "repositories" section of the mockup) should be displayed? [19:50] 119 templates in http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center, without any filter [19:50] michelr: remember that this will be split by module [19:50] I get 124 templates, for some reason [19:52] if you're running the latest build, can you tell me how online templates are managed? [19:55] it'a build from last week, and there is no online repo [19:55] so i can't tell you the number [19:56] ok [19:58] well, I hope that once it is included, the templates will all be in a single folder [19:59] given that there are about 20 Impress templates and 14 Writer templates [20:00] or rather, that the templates are organized much better than they are now [20:00] because, frankly, the online organization is a mess [20:01] <SteveBell> it is. but how could it be improved and who is then to be addressed= [20:02] I would separate the categories (accounting, agenda...) from the type (writer, calc...) [20:02] <alexanderW> Less categories? [20:02] and 'type' would be a new filter [20:03] <SteveBell> sure. especially empty categories aren't helpful [20:03] michelr: I would definitely separate the type [20:03] and remove the "-template" suffix ! [20:03] yup [20:04] honestly, I think it might just be better to use folders instead of categories if a sizeable number of templates need to be separated from the rest [20:04] such as a "Brochures" folder for Writer, if we have enough brochure templates [20:05] and, in general, generic templates wouldn't be categorized [20:05] (but could be tagged, for search purposes) [20:08] <alexanderW> Yes, I think we decided on that already while designing the mockup [20:08] <alexanderW> Since that would only complicate matters [20:10] as a dev, i can tell you it's much easier to handle (a list + filters) than (folders, subfolders) [20:11] <alexanderW> then we would need to define a syntax for tagging [20:11] well, we already handle folders and subfolders, and we will need to be able to handle them for third-party repositories [20:11] <alexanderW> of categories [20:13] so the template dialog must act like Finder/Nautilus/explorer ? [20:13] that's complicated ! [20:14] well, it should be already implemented that way [20:15] it seems incredible to reimplement such a huge code ! [20:16] no way to simplify the specs ? [20:17] I don't think so [20:17] not if we want to be compatible with third-party repositories [20:19] ok, so the idea is to be able to connect to any server and be able to retreive every possible template ? [20:20] I think so [20:21] mostly good for businesses that want to have a central business template database [20:21] <alexanderW> In business environment probably [20:23] <alexanderW> A bit hard to satisfy two different user types at the same time when the requirements differ like that [20:24] given how few templates we actually have, I think template categories are an unnecessary complication right now [20:25] <SteveBell> mirek2 agreed. [20:25] alexanderW: why not use a strong hierarchical view for online repos ? [20:26] and a flat list for local repo ? [20:26] <alexanderW> II think there currently isn't any actual hierarchy in the template repository [20:27] <alexanderW> ah [20:27] <SteveBell> ok I have to run. I hope to join again on one of the next meetings. have a nice day :) and hope you find a nice solution for this template question. [20:28] thanks, bye Steve [20:28] great having you here :) [20:28] bye [20:28] <alexanderW> I'm not sure if businesses would exclusively use online repos to store their templates [20:28] <alexanderW> Bye [20:29] == SteveBell [~Adium@mnhm-5f74f1ad.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] [20:30] <alexanderW> What might go in the direction of not having folders in the local repo would be having no folders by default [20:31] +1 [20:32] +1 [20:32] maybe we can ask devs if LO has a widget "hierarchical view" that would be ok for an online file browser ? [20:34] imho, it's the easiest way to handle folders and subfolders [20:34] <alexanderW> That would probably require quite some code changes again... [20:34] yup [20:34] <alexanderW> The sidebar of the options dialog possibly [20:34] but today, the code handles only one level of folder ? [20:35] no, it handles several [20:35] tbh, I just don't see the necessity in adding yet another view [20:35] why not just keep the dialog simple? [20:35] what's wrong with handling folders like file managers handle folders [20:37] (and like MS Office handles template folders) [20:37] well, i never use the "folder view" in file manangers ;-) always a list view [20:37] or column view on mac os [20:38] well, with templates, the thumbnail view is much more fitting [20:38] because previews are important [20:39] ok for previews [20:39] just listing template names isn't really useful for the user, especially because the names don't tend to say much [20:39] and, as said, we strive to encourage only having a few folders if any folders at all [20:40] i don't fully agree with folder navigation for templates [20:40] well, we've been over this -- we need to support folders [20:40] sorry, i meant "folder view navigation" [20:41] with multiple hierarchies [20:41] a Miller column view doesn't really work well if we want to show a preview of every template [20:42] (or if you think there's a good way to merge Miller columns and template thumbnails, feel free to post a mock-up) [20:43] maybe a compromise would be like the windows explorer : [20:44] - the folder hierarchy on the left [20:44] - the templates (with big previews) of the selected folder [20:46] afaik, windows explorer also shows folders in line with thumbnails [20:46] I think it's important to provide a way for the user to visualize the hierarchy [20:47] actually, every file manager I know of, both desktop and mobile, shows folders in line with thumbnails [20:48] yes, but it would be easier to code (i suppose) [20:48] some have a sidebar with commonly-used folders, usually folders for various file types (Documents, Images, Videos, etc.), and that use-case is covered by our tabs [20:48] michelr: we already have folders in line with templates, so it's easiest just to stick with what we have [20:50] I just don't see any benefit in having a separate folder pane [20:50] it's inconsistent with everything that's out there [20:50] it's hard to work with if you have a lot of folders [20:50] or just a complex hierarchy [20:51] and it gets in the way if you don't have a lot of folders [20:51] because you can easily manage your few folders inside the template view [20:53] alex, your thoughts? [20:54] <alexanderW> one sec [20:55] <alexanderW> I'm not sure if the effort is worth it [20:56] <alexanderW> Navigation would be easier, of course [20:57] would it? [20:57] of course ! [20:57] from my own experience, nested tree views in sidebars tend to be quite a pain to work with [20:57] <alexanderW> are we talking about a tree view now? [20:58] <alexanderW> no miller column [20:58] <alexanderW> *s [20:58] miller columns combined with thumbnail view? [20:59] in other words, squeezing the thumbnails into a single column? [20:59] or showing a thumbnail, one template at a time (which is basically what the old template manager does)? [21:01] <alexanderW> I wouldn't use miller columns [21:01] we need to see all thumbnails at the same time [21:02] so then tree view in the sidebar? [21:03] in the website, it would be like hierarchical categories (they are on the right side) [21:03] I think it's a good compromise [21:05] hierarchical categories? I don't know what you mean [21:06] if the sidebar is going to show folders, and we need to support more than one folder level, then that means that the sidebar has to use tree view to show subfolders [21:06] or that the thumbnail grid has to show folders, which would defeat the whole point of having a folder sidebar [21:07] it was just to use the website as en example [21:07] * an example [21:08] but the website doesn't feature nested folders [21:08] that's i wanted to say (in my poor english and with missing words :-/) [21:09] so imagine the website with a treeview instead of a flat list of category [21:10] well, you could have just told me that yes, the sidebar would feature a tree view in the first place [21:10] when it comes to tree views, I tend to agree with this page: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/03/trees-treeviews-and-ui.html [21:13] i agree [21:14] but in that case, we have to show an existing hierachy [21:14] and it seems to be the less worse solution [21:15] isn't the best solution simply to show folders inline, like every file browser does? [21:15] it's been thoroughly tested, there have been no complaints, it's been widely used [21:16] it's the way folders work on Mac OS and iOS applications using the iCloud modern folder management [21:16] (not sure what the official name is right now) [21:17] it's what Microsoft Office 2010 and 2013 use [21:18] it doesn't feature tree views, and we have the code for it already [21:18] == alexanderW [d4ff28c0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.255.40.192] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [21:19] and having folders inline makes for a much cleaner, simpler UI [21:20] and it works better with touch input, because a large square folder representation is easier to target than a much smaller sidebar entry [21:22] ok. [21:22] It's late for me, i have to quit [21:22] sorry if I sounded too harsh [21:22] Bye [21:22] alright, I hope I didn't dampen your spirits too much [21:23] we have both strong opinion ! [21:23] I'm certainly game to discuss it further, perhaps when there are more people [21:23] yup :) [21:24] well, see you later [21:24] very quick : one last idea [21:24] ok, go ahead [21:24] all those discussions should be "resolved" by user testing on prototypes [21:26] well, I'm not exactly sure about that [21:26] if you don't know, look for point #12 in the joel's list [21:27] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000043.html [21:27] user testing on prototypes is useful, but it can be heavily influenced by the tasks given to the user [21:27] well, we can discuss it next time [21:27] bye [21:28] e.g. if the user is told to find folder X buried under a complex hierarchy, the sidebar is better [21:28] but only because the user isn't familiar with the hierarchy [21:28] in actual use, the user should be familiar with what's on his computer [21:28] (same as with the file system) [21:29] actually, we don't even have to build prototypes [21:29] have you ever used a computer with a headache ? ;-) [21:29] we can simply use current file browsers to test this [21:30] :) ok, we'll discuss it further later [21:30] bye [21:30] bye