Design/Meetings/2013-04-06

Attendees

 * issa
 * mirek2
 * SteveBell
 * medival
 * astron

Topics

 * Wiki redesign
 * Website redesign
 * Template manager
 * Out-of-the-blue "new UI" proposal

Log
[15:04] hi everyone [15:04] anything you'd like to discuss? [15:13] nobody there? [15:21]  hi mirek2 [15:21]  I'm just lurking. am busy but was gonna read along [15:21]  nobody else here? [15:21]  kendy__ [15:21]  mirek2 do you have an agenda link? [15:23] hi all [15:29]  hi medieval [15:30] has here been some chat already? [15:30] hi everyone [15:30] not yet [15:31] anything you'd like to discuss? [15:31] have there been any interest by developers? [15:32] we're hoping that there will be interest in the GSoC projects [15:33] Kendy might also help with some toolbar work [15:34] I saw that you were looking somebody to make new UI or is the point to fix current UI? [15:34] I need to reply to that thread [15:34] the idea was to fix the UI [15:34] I'll explain in the e-mail [15:36] (Yes because I understanded from mail that goal is to make new UI, which I know wasn't from earlier chats) [15:37] that was brought up by others, I was just hoping we could have a dev for UX stuff [15:38] because UX changes tend to happen very slowly [15:38] I was hoping that too [15:38] and we have something to fix now (easyhacks) [15:38]  wow good job with the wiki cleanup. [15:39] that was Issa [15:39]  it's very nice [15:39] BTW i didn't find link to these (easyhacks) can you give me (mail)? [15:39]  the icons are ugly though :P [15:40] which ones? [15:40]  the four at the top [15:40] (i saw now) [15:41]  I don't have anything better in my pocket so I shut up. [15:41]  the IRC chat link goes to meetings [15:41]  both in the blue bar as well as at the bottom [15:41]  I find that confusing. [15:42]  because on the meetings page there is no info about the server or name of the IRC chan [15:42]  sry my bad [15:42] <SteveBell> there is [15:43] the meetings page is the same as the IRC chat page [15:44] <SteveBell> ok I made IRC chat bold so it's easier to spot for users coming from that link [15:45] <SteveBell> still not perfect but maybe we find 4 icons more in this style? http://www.iconarchive.com/show/vista-people-icons-by-icons-land/Groups-Meeting-Light-icon.html [15:45] <SteveBell> backlink sucks though... [15:47] <SteveBell> but issa did great. the structure is so much better now. [15:47] SteveBell: about the icons: please find a CC0 icon instead [15:48] the icons should also have a common style [15:50] <SteveBell> http://www.google.de/imgres?hl=de&sa=X&biw=1194&bih=1079&tbm=isch&tbnid=0Ta2aRFhaVgeZM:&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/royal-blue-icons/meeting-icon.html&docid=yrgQejxFsadWIM&imgurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/icons/preview/royal-blue/meeting-xxl.png&w=256&h=256&ei=2ENgUYOrG8jStAaQ44GAAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=637&vpy=330&dur=764&hovh=204&hovw=204&tx=75&ty=112&page=2&tbnh=143&tbnw=117&start=48&ndsp=51&ved=1t:429,r:96,s:0,i:376 [15:50] <SteveBell> sorry for insane link [15:51] <SteveBell> archive too http://www.google.de/imgres?hl=de&sa=X&biw=1194&bih=1079&tbm=isch&tbnid=0Ta2aRFhaVgeZM:&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/royal-blue-icons/meeting-icon.html&docid=yrgQejxFsadWIM&imgurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/icons/preview/royal-blue/meeting-xxl.png&w=256&h=256&ei=2ENgUYOrG8jStAaQ44GAAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=637&vpy=330&dur=764&hovh=204&hovw=204&tx=75&ty=112&page=2&tbnh=143&tbnw=117&start=48&ndsp=51&ved=1t:429,r:96,s:0, [15:52] <SteveBell> maybe whiteboard [15:52] <SteveBell> http://www.google.de/imgres?hl=de&sa=X&biw=1194&bih=1079&tbm=isch&tbnid=0Ta2aRFhaVgeZM:&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/royal-blue-icons/meeting-icon.html&docid=yrgQejxFsadWIM&imgurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/icons/preview/royal-blue/meeting-xxl.png&w=256&h=256&ei=2ENgUYOrG8jStAaQ44GAAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=637&vpy=330&dur=764&hovh=204&hovw=204&tx=75&ty=112&page=2&tbnh=143&tbnw=117&start=48&ndsp=51&ved=1t:429,r:96,s:0,i:376 [15:52] <SteveBell> maybe resources [15:52] <SteveBell> http://www.google.de/imgres?hl=de&sa=X&biw=1194&bih=1079&tbm=isch&tbnid=0Ta2aRFhaVgeZM:&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/royal-blue-icons/meeting-icon.html&docid=yrgQejxFsadWIM&imgurl=http://www.iconsdb.com/icons/preview/royal-blue/meeting-xxl.png&w=256&h=256&ei=2ENgUYOrG8jStAaQ44GAAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=637&vpy=330&dur=764&hovh=204&hovw=204&tx=75&ty=112&page=2&tbnh=143&tbnw=117&start=48&ndsp=51&ved=1t:429,r:96,s:0,i:376 [15:52] <SteveBell> what do you think? [15:52] <SteveBell> I find those more up to date and clean [15:53] these links all seem to go to the same page [15:53] <SteveBell> shoot [15:54] <SteveBell> just enter meeting, suitcase in the search field [15:54] <SteveBell> any color any size [15:54] <SteveBell> window for possible whiteboard ones [15:55] <SteveBell> and archive [15:55] <SteveBell> that would be it [15:55] <SteveBell> would make a better first impression for the design departement. [15:56] <SteveBell> C768056D-63D4-4F9F-A3D7-85E7F6BB4DD9-2849-000018BB2348659Chaving this thing greet new users might have a scary effect [15:56] <SteveBell> (the green archive thing) [15:56] the archive really shouldn't be one of the main choices [15:57] rather, we should have principles replace it [15:57] <SteveBell> huh? not sure what you mean. What do you think of the suggested icons? [15:59] I'm still not sure what they are... [15:59] could you link to the PNGs directly? [15:59] <SteveBell> http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/archive-icon.html [15:59] <SteveBell> should go to a box with arrow? [15:59] <SteveBell> whiteboard suggestions: http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/black-window-icons.html [16:00] hi astron [16:00] hi there [16:00] <SteveBell> hi astron [16:01] <SteveBell> and for the case: http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/?search=case [16:01] are you discussing already? [16:01] <SteveBell> we're just discussion possible replacement icons for https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design [16:02] <SteveBell> search for meeting, case, window and archive on that page [16:02] <SteveBell> sry search here: http://www.iconsdb.com/ [16:02] astron: my bad, forgot there was a time change [16:04] SteveBell: so, as I said, I would replace Archive with Principles, because the Archive is not important [16:04] (actually, it's a mess) [16:04] <SteveBell> whats principles? [16:04] the design principles we have [16:04] <SteveBell> what's the problem? why not replace them all? [16:04] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles [16:04] <SteveBell> oh oh another swiss discussion? [16:05] not reall [16:05] y [16:05] no, I mean replace the link to Archive with a link to Principles [16:05] <SteveBell> puh how does taht solve the icon problem? [16:05] hi issa [16:05] <SteveBell> also why not just replace ugly icons with good looking ones? [16:05] <SteveBell> hi issa [16:05] hi [16:05] <SteveBell> thanks for the wiki clean up [16:05] <SteveBell> great job [16:05] thanks :) [16:06] hi issa [16:06] hi mirek [16:06] <SteveBell> we were just discussing the icons used here: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design [16:06] SteveBell: it doesn't, but it means we have to look for a different icon [16:06] <SteveBell> I find them ugly and would love to replace them [16:06] archive: http://piratepad.net/D1uMqNICgG [16:06] <SteveBell> with [16:06] <SteveBell> http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/briefcase-3-icon.html [16:06] mirek2: thanks [16:07] I simply looked for public domain icons, didn't care a lot about them [16:07] <SteveBell> http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/window-icon.html [16:07] <SteveBell> http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/archive-icon.html [16:07] right... come to think of it we could probably find good icons on thenounproject.com [16:08] <SteveBell> http://www.iconsdb.com/black-icons/meeting-5-icon.html [16:12] astron: any suggestions? [16:12] mirek2: hm, im less and less convinced of it ... [16:13] the calendars eg, all seem pretty bad [16:13] <SteveBell> http://thenounproject.com/noun/meeting/#icon-No4201 [16:14] <SteveBell> use that instead of a calendar [16:14] <SteveBell> it's about "meeting" not calendar [16:14] thats good :) [16:14] <SteveBell> perfect [16:14] and simple [16:14] yes that's good [16:15] <SteveBell> whiteboard: http://thenounproject.com/noun/new-window/#icon-No2864 [16:15] (we were discussing someone missing a meeting because of the time change today, yet I did the same lol) [16:15] doesn't really ring whiteboard for me [16:16] re whiteboards, this seems a bit funkay, but: http://thenounproject.com/noun/big-idea/#icon-No13679 [16:16] what if we merged Analyses and Whiteboards into a Projects page? [16:16] <SteveBell> hmm, not sure. the current I can't even decide whether I'M looking at a laptop or an actual whiteboard :P [16:16] there are very few projects on both pages, and it's annoying to have to follow both for news [16:16] <SteveBell> astron: too much details for my taste. [16:16] <SteveBell> I like simple [16:17] astron: I like it [16:17] it conveys the point well [16:17] <SteveBell> or this as whiteboard? http://thenounproject.com/noun/new-window/#icon-No8348 [16:17] mirek2: that's what I did, I just preferred the name Whiteboards [16:17] well, we'd have to adapt the drawing style a bit [16:17] the funky one looks alright [16:18] we are the fun team :p [16:18] issa: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Analyses is still a separate page [16:19] issa: I'm not sure what you mean [16:19] mirek2: yes, I kept it but added the content here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards [16:19] <SteveBell> archive would cost 2$ http://thenounproject.com/noun/archive/#icon-No8945 imo worth having a nice entry page [16:19] issa: oh, ok; it's not an implementation in progress, though [16:19] I'll fix it [16:20] could we please replace "Principles" with "Archive"? [16:20] good [16:20] principles or guidelines? (or are they the same thing) [16:20] steve: you can use these for free if you give attribution [16:21] <SteveBell> well even better. then here's resources: http://thenounproject.com/noun/briefcase/#icon-No6048 [16:21] <SteveBell> what's a good thing to illustrate "principles"? [16:21] issa: they're different [16:22] mirek2: wouldnt the principles fall under reseources, too? [16:22] <SteveBell> but to be honest as important as principles is, I highly doubt it will be an often visited page [16:23] <SteveBell> just a long list of things not many people will ever read [16:23] astron: I think they're closer to guidelines [16:23] <SteveBell> that will (like the old icons) probably scare people away [16:23] SteveBell: Archive is no better, to be honest [16:23] <SteveBell> it'S good to have but I wouldn't place that as prominently as the four major items on the startpage [16:24] and the principles we have are really quite important [16:24] why don't we merge principles and guidelines? [16:24] mirek2: what i mean is we already have a resources page that we could link them from [16:24] <SteveBell> hm it has visuals and might be helpful to people looking for LO related things [16:24] <SteveBell> issa good point. +1 [16:24] call them rule book or bible [16:25] astron: sure, but, for consistency, we would also need to link to guidelines in that case [16:25] <SteveBell> consistency with what? [16:25] if principles are resources, so would guidelines be [16:26] also, we share the resources page with the marketing team [16:26] our principles are not really relevant to them [16:26] I wouldn't object to merging Principles with Guidelines, though [16:26] <SteveBell> I'm not sure I follow that logic. yes that's why merging principals and guidelines makes sense. [16:27] <SteveBell> so can we agree on merging principals and guidelines? [16:28] I guess [16:29] we'll need a better way to navigate, then [16:29] both pages are already quite large [16:29] and the guidelines page will only grow [16:29] another horizontal menu at the top, for starters? [16:30] (with no background, below the green rectangles) [16:30] the guidelines seems short? [16:30] <SteveBell> hm it's not possible to collaps stuff in the wiki is it? [16:30] <SteveBell> issa agreed [16:31] <SteveBell> if collapsing is no option I'd say just add a index of content and be done? [16:33] alright, I guess that could work [16:33] I don't think the current guidelines page make sense [16:34] unless it's guidelines for specific design modules (infobar, popovers, etc) [16:34] it used to carry the label "HIG" [16:34] I see [16:35] HIG is short for Human Interface Guidelines [16:35] we could the principles general guidelines, and these module specific guidelines [16:35] or something like that [16:35] mirek2: general guidelines and human interface guidelines then [16:36] would those be two pages, or one? [16:37] one i guess [16:37] with tables the principles should be a lot shorter [16:37] hum... why do i need to sign up for the noun project now? have they gone evil? [16:38] astron: not sure why a signup is necessary. I agree it's annoying [16:38] it didn't use to be this way [16:40] I know. Maybe it increases the odds that one will purchase a symbol? [16:41] no, seems like you can purchase without signing in [16:41] I know the project's had money problems [16:42] anyway [16:43] <SteveBell> is there an action list or do we change that stuff now? [16:43] i made a small change to the design page (borders, text colour) – is that okay for you? [16:44] <SteveBell> rounded corners and green text? [16:44] yep [16:44] <SteveBell> I like the rounded corners [16:44] <SteveBell> not sure about the green text [16:44] well it matches the colour scheme of the top [16:45] but it doesn't match the wiki's front page and development page now [16:46] <SteveBell> issa true. I'd say stick to the standard and if discuss with others to change all boxes to rounded corners [16:46] ok [16:46] <SteveBell> would be a nice change. but I disagree with the green text [16:47] here's a merged Principles and Guidelines page with a TOC [16:47] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Guidelines [16:47] I don't like it in this state [16:47] might help if the TOC doesn't show the third level [16:48] <SteveBell> mirek2 yes. that's imo the solution to that problem [16:48] the problem with the TOC is that it doesn't exactly work with the tables [16:48] or we could just keep them on separate pages and just provide another menu [16:48] although, i would propose using floated divs [16:49] ... and then we would already be rid of the third level [16:49] ..? [16:49] astron: I also disagree with the green text -- seems like a link [16:49] ok. [16:49] mirek2: [16:51] does not work [16:51] <SteveBell> not sure about the over all format. maybe all points under "speedy" should be bullet points instead of own headlines? if they are that small that would make a much more readable wiki page [16:51] <SteveBell> (talking about the Guidelinges wiki page) [16:51] SteveBell: yes, that's what I did for the design page [16:52] SteveBell: I would prefer to keep them as titles [16:52] SteveBell: never mind, this isn't what you're talking about lol [16:52] <SteveBell> actually it is. [16:52] <SteveBell> why headlines mirek2? [16:52] <SteveBell> if not contained in the TOC [16:52] <SteveBell> does it matter? [16:53] <SteveBell> takes less space and is much more readable [16:54] because this isn't what bullet points are for [16:54] this isn't an unordered list [16:55] <SteveBell> what is it then? [16:55] <SteveBell> and how does it currently differ from bullet points? [16:55] <SteveBell> the items listed under "Speedy" would be just as ordered or unordered as they are now. [16:55] <SteveBell> I don't see the difference [16:57] what makes this unfit for a buletted list are the paragraphs of text that comprise the definition [16:58] <SteveBell> why is that? make the headlne bold and leave the description as is. voila you have your diffenciation. [16:58] a bulleted list should be concise [16:59] we could theoretically use bold text instead of heading text, but that's an ugly hack that I'd prefer to avoid [17:00] <SteveBell> if that is true then my suggestion wasn't smart. but again: again, could be worth a try and I'd bet its a) smaller b) readable (especially in comparison to now) I find it atm rather hard to see any structure. viewing the difference between headline 2 and headline 3 is so little it's hard to spot [17:03] mirek2 are you editing the page? [17:03] <SteveBell> issa while mirek2 is working on that page, could you try the other icons? [17:04] SteveBell: sure [17:04] <SteveBell> so we'd have to decide which size and color we want them [17:04] <SteveBell> should they all be black or does that make the page look boring [17:05] how about something like https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Guidelines? [17:05] the text in the menu should probably be bigger in the final implementation [17:05] <SteveBell> I'd be all in for that and would consider that an improvement [17:06] and the Principles page would contain the same menu, of course [17:06] I've tried the tables style https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Issa/Design/Guidelines [17:06] <SteveBell> ah that's what you're about. [17:06] <SteveBell> hm, I still would prefere a merger [17:06] <SteveBell> tabel style looks good too [17:07] should I use a 3-column format? [17:07] <SteveBell> imo no, could be to narrow on small screens [17:07] <SteveBell> or mobiles or whatever [17:08] <SteveBell> I do like those rounded corners astron. maybe keep those and show that as a prototype to other wiki sections later? [17:09] issa: I prefer the standard paragraph style, only because it's more fit for reading [17:10] mirek2: well if we go with the tables they would be rewritten as bullets [17:10] for example the design page contained too much text in paragraph form, now it's skimmed [17:10] I would like that even less [17:11] issa: I do like that [17:11] hehe [17:11] <SteveBell> mirek2 sorry to disagree. I find the structure much clearer in the box solution (but that's just me) [17:12] the thing is, the tables are something to merely glance at if you're looking for something specific [17:12] they serve as filters [17:12] good when a page contains distinct sections [17:12] the principles, however, should be read as a whole [17:12] <SteveBell> ah I get you. [17:12] <SteveBell> makes sense [17:13] <SteveBell> sorry, my IRC client is doing weird things [17:13] that's fine [17:15] they are quite distinct [17:15] splitting them makes them seem shorter [17:16] <SteveBell> yes it keeps the wiki dense. [17:16] <SteveBell> astron medieval kendy__ any thoughts? [17:17] issa: they're meant to be read as a whole [17:17] actually, the categories didn't even originally exist; they were added on later [17:17] they can still be read as a whole [17:18] I guess I'm thinking of the wiki as a slideshow, rather than a text document [17:18] <SteveBell> hm maybe make the heading without a box? then a headline and the first boxes? then there's building blocks as the next section? [17:19] i would put the principles on one page, but rather put them in floating divs, so you can read them better – but of course this breaks the page structure [17:19] <SteveBell> in all I find the box solution good because it have a very clear structure and spares us a TOC. [17:20] hm, maybe there's a way to trigger the toc creation by giving out id's or so? [17:24] regarding the wiki icons, is attributing the author on the file page enough? [17:24] also do I color the icons or keep them black? [17:25] issa: only if the images link to the file pages [17:25] if they don't, there would be no easy way to see the attribution [17:25] <SteveBell> so attribution needs to be visible? [17:26] <SteveBell> maybe could be a small hint in the page bottom. [17:26] <SteveBell> shouldn't the images rather link to the respective wiki section? [17:26] that's probably not doable [17:26] they should [17:26] that's why it's preferable just to use CC0 icons [17:27] mirek2: agreed [17:27] <SteveBell> what does the image license say? link back to source or name source or what? [17:28] SteveBell1: it says "attribute" :p [17:28] <SteveBell> and that means? [17:28] theres more ... [17:29] let me look, theres a page for that [17:29] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode [17:29] http://thenounproject.com/using-symbols/ [17:29] http://thenounproject.com/using-symbols/#digital-attribution [17:30] "The attribution must be listed where it’s easily accessible and visible to the viewer." [17:32] well clicking on the link gets you there [17:32] <SteveBell> I don't know if that is really a problem. [17:32] oh well, not in this case, sorry [17:32] <SteveBell> the definition seems stretchable [17:32] <SteveBell> and if they complain it can be fixed [17:32] <SteveBell> also why not invest 2-3$ to have a nice wiki page if then no clutter has to happen [17:33] but really having some fine print at the bottom seems ok to me [17:33] <SteveBell> I'd be willing to donate the amount, since I've not yet donated to the LO project :P [17:33] SteveBell1: let's be fair and follow their guidelines [17:33] me too [17:33] is there a particular icon you'd like? [17:34] <SteveBell> resources http://thenounproject.com/noun/briefcase/#icon-No6048 [17:34] <SteveBell> I don#t like that guy drawing on the whiteboard but if that is consensus I'm in [17:34] <SteveBell> http://thenounproject.com/noun/archive/#icon-No8945 [17:34] to be honest, that doesn't really ring resources for me [17:34] resources is mainly a graphics source [17:34] for use by everyone [17:35] a briefcase is a personal container for documents [17:35] <SteveBell> can be changed. just was looking for a similar replacement [17:35] <SteveBell> (to the existing one) [17:36] maybe we won't need a cc-by icon after all [17:37] <SteveBell> what I like about those icons is the simplicity and that they are in a mathcing style [17:37] <SteveBell> again, if this is about 5€ let's pay that and be done. [17:37] do we have a good icon, though? [17:37] mirek2_: yes I only picked a briefcase/portifolio because that was the best my source had [17:38] sure, that's okay [17:38] <SteveBell> should we go through the noun project icon by icon? I have the feeling we're circeling. [17:38] but if we're going to pay money for an icon, at least it should fit well as a symbol [17:38] <SteveBell> true that :) [17:38] perhaps the best thing to do would be to create a symbol ourselves... [17:38] would anyone like to do that? [17:39] as long as its simple, i can do something terrible... [17:39] <SteveBell> I disagree. there's so much to be done. let's not "waste" (not wasted, but somethign else could be done) limited resources [17:40] <SteveBell> I'd rathe use something existing and be done when the meeting is finished. no? [17:40] also, http://thenounproject.com/noun/baggage/#icon-No12, eg is PD [17:40] <SteveBell> this is CC0 http://thenounproject.com/noun/meeting/#icon-No4201 [17:41] <SteveBell> sounds like a good meeting icon, no? [17:41] let's use those for the time being, then [17:41] <SteveBell> sounds = looks [17:41] our meeting icon is too, and big ideas are CC0 too [17:41] <SteveBell> so that would work [17:41] and http://thenounproject.com/noun/big-idea/#icon-No13679 for whiteboards [17:41] <SteveBell> what about color? all black or 4 different colors like google style? [17:42] that would probably look a bit harsh at that size [17:42] <SteveBell> what? [17:42] black would [17:42] sorry for my brevity [17:42] <SteveBell> yes, color might be more friendly [17:43] why not keep similar colours then? [17:43] <SteveBell> np. it's just answering or questions with a statement … :P [17:43] <SteveBell> all blue? [17:43] <SteveBell> dark and light? [17:43] <SteveBell> or what do you mean? [17:44] similar colours to the ones that are there, i mean [17:44] <SteveBell> oh nooooes. not more green please [17:44] <SteveBell> sorry [17:44] well, the archive is gone anyway [17:44] so no green [17:44] one of the books for Guidelines? http://thenounproject.com/noun/book/ [17:44] <SteveBell> very good [17:45] I'd leave the color up to whoever is going to publish the icons [17:45] hehe ... used http://thenounproject.com/noun/book/#icon-No2248 at suse [17:45] would anyone like to do that? [17:45] ok, will do [17:45] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:I_whiteboards.png [17:45] astron: sorry, go on :p [17:46] everyone agrees that astron can pick his colors? [17:46] yes [17:46] and if we don't like them, we can complain next week [17:46] good :) [17:46] fine, then [17:46] great [17:47] anything else? [17:47] regarding the icons? [17:47] <SteveBell> drinks more wine to take the upcoming green splash [17:47] *these icons? [17:47] i think mirek means a new topic [17:47] ok [17:48] ... how about: future of the template manager..? [17:48] <SteveBell> but do we have all icons? [17:48] <SteveBell> also is there an action list to follow-up` [17:48] SteveBell1: I think so [17:48] <SteveBell> ? [17:48] SteveBell1: no, no action list [17:48] action list? [17:48] also, would anyone like to take care of the Guidelines page [17:48] ? [17:49] I'm afraid not me [17:49] or should we leave it as is? [17:49] it needs fixing one day [17:50] mirek: can you do it? [17:50] (or does it involve too much html?) [17:51] astron: I'd probably prefer to leave it as is [17:52] don't really have the time for it [17:52] ok [17:52] then lets do that later [17:52] alright [17:52] I forgot to ask about ESC call updates... [17:52] are there any this week? [17:52] <SteveBell> for the protocol: I liked issa's box version. [17:53] <SteveBell> what's ESC? [17:53] engineering steering committee [17:53] they hold a call every week [17:53] the minutes from that call are posted on the dev mailing list [17:54] they're very terse, though, so it's usually good to go over the things relevant to us in more detail [17:55] astron: any updates from the call? [17:55] okay, yes: [17:57] astron: isn't that better handled with styles? [17:57] themes, I mean [17:58] i hadnt considered that – but then themes dont exist yet and we have a regression currently [17:59] also, i dont think those two functions are equivalent [17:59] alright [17:59] let's start a whiteboard for it, then [18:00] yes, please [18:00] * michael said he would like to (have someone) look into rotation in writer/calc – but only 90° rotations [18:01] I saw that on the mailing list [18:01] yes [18:01] confused about its implementability [18:01] btw, any details about the style copying feature? [18:01] how would it work? [18:02] what's the scope? [18:02] is there a similar feature in any other piece of software? [18:02] well, you can try it in 3.6 and before [18:02] im not sure about similar features in mso [18:03] so, the old dialogue is gone, but there still is a feature to copy _all_ styles from a template [18:04] where in 3.6? [18:04] where in the dialog? [18:04] waah... u 2 quick [18:04] sorry [18:04] feature to copy all styles: can be found in the Styles sidebar/floating window – load styles (top right) [18:05] okay, about the feature that doesnt exist anymore – it was under file > templates > and then advanced or so [18:06] cant try it since ive upgraded here [18:06] let me check my parent laptop [18:06] I happen to be on a computer with 3.6, so I can find it [18:07] well, whats in file > templates? [18:07] organize, address book source, edit, and save [18:08] right, organize! [18:09] and in that window you can (i believe) right click onto individual styles [18:10] organize seems to be just the regular template manager [18:10] Load styles is the style-related dialog [18:10] hm ... [18:10] it lists checkboxes for the various style types at the bottom [18:12] no organize is the right dialogue [18:13] mirek2_ you cant choose individual styles [18:14] where in "organize"? [18:15] ok, choose "documents" at the bottom left – you now get your current document, then double click the document, doubleclick styles [18:16] then d'n'd individual styles to the right side [18:16] (completely undiscoverable, i know) [18:17] shockingly so [18:17] what happens when you drag-and-drop them? [18:17] (I have no templates here, maybe that's a problem) [18:18] well in this case youre dropping them into the same document – so right now, nothing. if you have templates, then, the styles are added to the document [18:18] (after clicking OK) [18:19] no, there is no OK .. then immediately id guess [18:19] wait, styles from templates are added to the document, or styles from the document are added to templates? [18:20] the 1st one [18:20] although i suppose you can do it the other way around too ... didnt bother to try [18:21] alright [18:21] i am not a regular user of this feature... [18:22] what i think would be best is improving the "load styles" features of the styles window [18:24] I'll just start a whiteboard on it, you can add your proposal then [18:24] right [18:25] any other topics? [18:26] back to the wiki for a bit [18:26] don't we need a place for things that need implementation? [18:26] mirek2_ dont think so right now – although you can see michaels and kendy action items [18:26] you know somewhere for developers to look in? [18:27] issa: good idea. and never occurred to me... thats bad. [18:28] astron: well I noticed how no one besides mirek2_ knows where the easy hacks are at :p [18:28] a waiting for implementation section? [18:28] so a separate page for devs? [18:28] sounds like a very good idea [18:29] mirek2_: yes that's what I'm thinking [18:29] (separate page I mean) [18:29] could you add it, then? [18:29] it could have a simple format like Bug#xxx – Whiteboard here [18:29] to the menu bar and to the icon list [18:29] for its entries [18:30] should be categorized into EasyHacks, GSoC projects, and Other [18:30] I can make the page but I'm not sure I have the entries [18:31] we might also have Papercuts [18:31] seems complicated, can someone else make it instead lol? [18:32] mirek: why not make them easy hacks? [18:32] what should it be called btw? [18:32] it would seem inconsistent to me [18:32] astron: it would be a subproject of easyhacks [18:32] ok... [18:32] what should the whole page be called? [18:33] Blueprints? [18:33] why not waiting for implementation? [18:34] or ready for implementation [18:34] astron: would that work as a page title? [18:34] given that it will basically be a bug list, I'm not sure ready for implementaion is appropriate [18:34] just because you don't implement bugs [18:34] a bug list with whiteboards [18:35] also, you implement fixes for bugs [18:35] in that case, though, it won't contain most of the easy hacks, as they don't tend to have whiteboards [18:36] ok. name it anything – i dont want to waste time here [18:36] who will make the page, though? [18:36] we have two separate things, the output of whiteboards and bugs [18:37] I can make it, but should it include both of these? [18:38] it's up to you [18:39] ok I'll think about it [18:41] any other topics? [18:42] I've been working on a template for brochures [18:43] cool [18:43] seems like we'll be sticking with the website motifs until it's changed [18:43] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Brochure-lo-4---A4-paper-size--v4--websitelike.odt [18:44] I really hope it's changed soon [18:44] someone complained about this not being home printing friendly so I made another one [18:44] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Brochure-lo-4---A4-paper-size--v4--websitelike--inksaver.odt [18:44] currently, the website looks like we took a stock website design and just copied over images [18:44] mirek2_: those were my exact words! [18:45] it looks very commercial too [18:45] but its not my business and i dont want to put the alterway down [18:45] I will be working with those who made the current website on a new design [18:46] well, thats good :) [18:46] I'm not sure when we will start but I can take feedback directly from you guys here [18:46] great! what exactly will you be working on? [18:46] pretty much everything lol [18:47] restructuring, merging old website with the new one, and design [18:47] ok [18:48] it'd be good if the website used the LibreOffice green at least [18:48] this was my concept for the front page before the 4.0 launch http://vm13.documentfoundation.org/I_libo4new/ [18:48] it's pretty good, though the typography needs some work [18:49] issa: awesome, a download button with a single clickable area..! [18:49] this is my concept for the header using the same "tech" as the current website http://vm13.documentfoundation.org/I_libo4header/ [18:49] I like that much, much more [18:49] still, our fantastic people all look like models... [18:50] (and most of them are female) [18:50] though the download button could still use a redesign there [18:50] I didn't change the content, just the header [18:50] <SteveBell> header meaning that bar at the top? I don't see any images [18:51] <SteveBell> will the round thing be changed? I don't think the current one is ideal with that half circle [18:51] the green area behind the logo and the navigation beneath it [18:51] <SteveBell> this is what I see: http://cl.ly/image/2H0w253q3P1Z [18:51] try to reload maybe [18:52] SteveBell1: http://i.imm.io/128n0.png [18:52] <SteveBell> ah yes. so much better than the current one. [18:52] SteveBell1: that's probably a resolution problem [18:52] SteveBell1: I changed the code myself and it's super messy.. that's why I'll leave to the pros :p [18:53] <SteveBell> no problem at all. just so we can discuss this. good job with that! [18:53] It's still early, but I think we'll have five-ish main pages with jump navigation [18:54] the old website was too cluttered, I'd rather any text heavy thing redirect you to the wiki instead [18:55] issa: can you try pushing for open sans instead of open sans condensed, please? [18:55] its just much more readable [18:55] and pleasant [18:56] astron: sure, no problem [18:56] +1 [18:57] for the body text only or shall we change the headers as well? [18:57] too many downloadable fonts only creates loading times problems [18:57] sorry guys, I've been logged off [18:57] no problem [18:57] issa: for the body text only or shall we change the headers as well? astron: too many downloadable fonts only creates loading times problems – mirek2 has joined the room [18:58] astron: but we are designers, we are only concerned with making it look pretty :p [18:59] hopefully not [18:59] anyway, a last topic if thats ok: what do you think about the libreoffice sidebar exploration with python thing thats landed on the ml [19:00] (design ml) [19:00] I think we should work on a design we could agree on first [19:01] because I don't think it would be easy to change things late [19:01] *later [19:02] also, if you look here: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:KeithCu#Coding_advice_from_Michael_Meeks [19:02] I would really prefer to refine what we have then start on something completely new [19:02] it sounds like it will be a two-day project ... which is ridiculous [19:03] I'm not sure whether to interpret the project as a way to create a prototype or really creating the UI [19:03] as a prototype, it might be interesting [19:03] one might lead to the other [19:03] (i think) [19:04] I guess we need more info/clarification [19:04] but it's good new regardless :) [19:04] *news [19:04] would either of you like to write a mail to keith? [19:05] a reply on the mailing list sounds more appropriate [19:05] but I personally don't want to right now [19:06] (i meant a reply on the list) [19:06] I'm waiting for someone more knowledgable to reply first [19:06] ok [19:07] then i may try a reply if it doesnt slip my mind as so much does ^^ [19:07] cool [19:08] back to the website for a bit, do you think the sliders should stay or not? [19:08] (they will be part of the main page not a page on its own) [19:08] I don't like the sliders, because they are completely impersonal and don't represent the project well [19:09] <SteveBell> another screenshot? [19:09] redesigned sliders not the same ones [19:09] stevebell1: the three slides that are now on the home page [19:09] SteveBell1: give me a minute [19:10] i personally love the slogan behind it [19:10] i am not sure if it needs to slide, and certainly it should stop after sliding once,... [19:12] something like this http://i.imm.io/128uk.png [19:12] (only the text and image would change) [19:13] <SteveBell> where would that go? over the current existing backgorund? [19:13] SteveBell1: beneath the green header I showed you earlier [19:13] <SteveBell> sounds good. [19:14] issa: what about the download button? would it stay in place? or would it move with the slide? [19:14] it would stay [19:15] that sounds good [19:15] technically it would almost the same as the current one, but with new images [19:15] *almost be [19:15] don't know if it's necessary, but I'd be ok with it [19:15] <SteveBell> currently it's a little irritating that donate brings you to the old page. if that was designed in the new page as well then all main points would be covered. [19:15] <SteveBell> and main website would be the only item bringing the user to the main page [19:16] even downloading brings you to the old page... [19:16] SteveBell1: hopefully all pages will be matching in the new design, no 2 websites [19:16] <SteveBell> well that would be covered with issa s concept, no? [19:16] yes [19:16] <SteveBell> issa, not sure I understand. all pages will be re-designed? [19:17] yes [19:17] yes [19:17] <SteveBell> all pages of the old webpage? really? sounds like a huge job [19:18] well not everything will stay [19:18] <SteveBell> but a welcome change. [19:18] also I will be the designer, I won't necessarily manage the content [19:18] <SteveBell> ok, is there any testing server? Would be great to have this online to test and provide feedback [19:18] <SteveBell> sure that. [19:18] <SteveBell> you know? push changes frequently [19:19] <SteveBell> to ensure short distance and early feedback on changes [19:19] yes there is, but we haven't started yet :p [19:20] <SteveBell> should this be an item somewhere in the wiki? sounds like a major project [19:21] <SteveBell> imo high priority [19:21] yes it should [19:21] will the templates and extensions pages be changed as well? [19:21] (those need a major redesign, imho) [19:22] where are this even accessed from? [19:23] *these [19:23] <SteveBell> depending on the time available that would be very low prio imo. That could also be approached after the rest is done. But since it sounds like issa will be the lead designer on this, it's up to him. [19:24] (never mind, found them) [19:24] <SteveBell> https://extensions.libreoffice.org/ [19:24] <SteveBell> those pages are confusing as hell [19:24] stevbell1: those are outside of the scope here [19:24] <SteveBell> I tried uploading a template once and couldn't do it. :P [19:25] also, andreas is just another volunteer [19:25] yes, this should be a different project as it's a sub-website [19:25] same with help.libreoffice.org [19:25] <SteveBell> issa = andreas? [19:26] no. issa = issa alkurtass, andreas = andreas mantke [19:27] SteveBell1: I think he meant the guy who made the extensions site [19:27] issa: yes [19:27] <SteveBell> ah thanks for clarifying [19:27] also, he runs the extension site [19:28] <SteveBell> wasn't meaning to discredit his work. it's just confusing and looking at those pages wouldn't hurt [19:28] (fun fact: I'm standing next to him in the conference group photo) [19:28] <SteveBell> but let's stick to the topic at hand. extensions out of scope if I understood correctly [19:29] SteveBell1: yes, any subdomain (something.libreoffice.org) is out of scope [19:36] any other topics? [19:37] lets finish [19:38] i can upload the log [19:38] ok :) [19:39] bye then, have nice next week. [19:40] it's not weekend here, but thanks :p [19:41] excuse my cultural ignorance ^^
 * well, cedric/michael are pressing for a design to copy particular styles over from templates into the current doc