Light Blue for Non-printing characters

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
28 messages Options
Next » 12
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi all

Displaying Non-printing characters is a commonly used feature by people formatting documents (or cleaning up oddly formatted text).
I think it's a great idea to have the symbols in another colour. But Light Blue is hard to see (especially in thin fonts) or maybe it's just my eyes getting older...

Wouldn't it be possible to add an option to allow the user to select the colour? (It could be Light Blue as default).

Since version 4.3 is still in Beta stage the option could be added now before the change to mandatory Light Blue occurs...

I can add a Feature Request in the Tracker if people agree that this makes sense...

Thanks!

Pedro
Antonio García Antonio García
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

I'm not against this idea at all. It seems perfectly reasonable.

Why light blue, instead of a light grey?

This is my first time responding to a thread in this group; am I allowed to
do so?


On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Pedro <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Displaying Non-printing characters is a commonly used feature by people
> formatting documents (or cleaning up oddly formatted text).
> I think it's a great idea to have the symbols in another colour. But Light
> Blue is hard to see (especially in thin fonts) or maybe it's just my eyes
> getting older...
>
> Wouldn't it be possible to add an option to allow the user to select the
> colour? (It could be Light Blue as default).
>
> Since version 4.3 is still in Beta stage the option could be added now
> before the change to mandatory Light Blue occurs...
>
> I can add a Feature Request in the Tracker if people agree that this makes
> sense...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Pedro
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Light-Blue-for-Non-printing-characters-tp4110478.html
> Sent from the Design mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>


--
Antonio Garcia
773.336.2259
[hidden email]

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Stefan Knorr Stefan Knorr
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all,

On 27/05/14 21:04, Antonio García wrote:
> Why light blue, instead of a light grey?

Personally, I don't like that this colour is hard-coded. At all.

As for light blue, there are precedents in which a similar colour is
used. For more details, see:
  https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68071

I should probably finally open that new bug I promised in Comment 11...

Astron.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJThh8uAAoJEJCfzwJOvloOjVAH/0YyDMc9BPtK2s7SM+aESstq
kECoEMDOk+ZBy/+Ib7R7FqPbjgoZaKC2UtlLT5ymRdOoTcr3SA+Yi9dPz7kXgZCq
JFLMfzqurRIc8HMmndjUpXsWEu1TWcML9ZLh0dA/mDQqFkD6jeSRQ1XhwuaDL65K
ZCrjIGhias8LyrF2XNehnTT4ZDx9lPBvOxUNfAw8P7lsI/I05LmbaDHvK+BfxeZN
5xXCaWDR+ZFPXnRVlCU6zSTjm7p6Bh+28dCXs8SRnD177UoE/hkMkUMUXh5ljbU+
y673deWe/gVZrNhwjVUz3IXOWP8E0yrVmLRHhSbEt/GpWgYqKLjpv5kDy54V0kA=
=Pr0l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Antonio García Antonio García
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Very interesting. Thank you for sending me further details.


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Stefan Knorr <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all,
>
> On 27/05/14 21:04, Antonio García wrote:
> > Why light blue, instead of a light grey?
>
> Personally, I don't like that this colour is hard-coded. At all.
>
> As for light blue, there are precedents in which a similar colour is
> used. For more details, see:
>   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68071
>
> I should probably finally open that new bug I promised in Comment 11...
>
> Astron.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJThh8uAAoJEJCfzwJOvloOjVAH/0YyDMc9BPtK2s7SM+aESstq
> kECoEMDOk+ZBy/+Ib7R7FqPbjgoZaKC2UtlLT5ymRdOoTcr3SA+Yi9dPz7kXgZCq
> JFLMfzqurRIc8HMmndjUpXsWEu1TWcML9ZLh0dA/mDQqFkD6jeSRQ1XhwuaDL65K
> ZCrjIGhias8LyrF2XNehnTT4ZDx9lPBvOxUNfAw8P7lsI/I05LmbaDHvK+BfxeZN
> 5xXCaWDR+ZFPXnRVlCU6zSTjm7p6Bh+28dCXs8SRnD177UoE/hkMkUMUXh5ljbU+
> y673deWe/gVZrNhwjVUz3IXOWP8E0yrVmLRHhSbEt/GpWgYqKLjpv5kDy54V0kA=
> =Pr0l
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>



--
Antonio Garcia
773.336.2259
[hidden email]

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Laurent Lyaudet Laurent Lyaudet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi all,

I prefer the possibility to choose the color as suggested by
Jean-Baptiste in comment 10 and Pedro.
However there could be also an option to make it depend on the selection
color as Astron suggest.
I think the best solution is to have all these possibilities.

However it would be welcome to create only one feature request that
represents the decision we reached.
If someone thinks having both is not a good solution, I propose to set a
doodle to decide between :
- a only
- b only
- a and b.

Best regards,
     Laurent



On 28/05/2014 21:03, Antonio García wrote:

> Very interesting. Thank you for sending me further details.
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Stefan Knorr <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On 27/05/14 21:04, Antonio García wrote:
>>> Why light blue, instead of a light grey?
>> Personally, I don't like that this colour is hard-coded. At all.
>>
>> As for light blue, there are precedents in which a similar colour is
>> used. For more details, see:
>>    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68071
>>
>> I should probably finally open that new bug I promised in Comment 11...
>>
>> Astron.
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJThh8uAAoJEJCfzwJOvloOjVAH/0YyDMc9BPtK2s7SM+aESstq
>> kECoEMDOk+ZBy/+Ib7R7FqPbjgoZaKC2UtlLT5ymRdOoTcr3SA+Yi9dPz7kXgZCq
>> JFLMfzqurRIc8HMmndjUpXsWEu1TWcML9ZLh0dA/mDQqFkD6jeSRQ1XhwuaDL65K
>> ZCrjIGhias8LyrF2XNehnTT4ZDx9lPBvOxUNfAw8P7lsI/I05LmbaDHvK+BfxeZN
>> 5xXCaWDR+ZFPXnRVlCU6zSTjm7p6Bh+28dCXs8SRnD177UoE/hkMkUMUXh5ljbU+
>> y673deWe/gVZrNhwjVUz3IXOWP8E0yrVmLRHhSbEt/GpWgYqKLjpv5kDy54V0kA=
>> =Pr0l
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
>> Problems?
>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
>> deleted
>>
>
>


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi all

Laurent Lyaudet wrote
I prefer the possibility to choose the color as suggested by
Jean-Baptiste in comment 10 and Pedro.
However there could be also an option to make it depend on the selection
color as Astron suggest.
I think the best solution is to have all these possibilities.
I would suggest (to make everyone happy) that the Colour for Non-printing characters it is set to light blue by default when the font has the default colour (black). If the font colour is not black then the non-printing characters are by default set to the selection colour (as suggested by Astron) . This can always be overridden if the user selects a specific colour.

I think that adding the option to allow the user to select a colour would require only to add a new entry in the Options dialog (under LibreOffice > Appearance > Custom colours > General) named Non-printing characters.

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic? :)

Kind regards,
Pedro
nalimilan nalimilan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Le jeudi 29 mai 2014 à 08:26 -0700, Pedro a écrit :

> Hi all
>
>
> Laurent Lyaudet wrote
> > I prefer the possibility to choose the color as suggested by
> > Jean-Baptiste in comment 10 and Pedro.
> > However there could be also an option to make it depend on the selection
> > color as Astron suggest.
> > I think the best solution is to have all these possibilities.
>
> I would suggest (to make everyone happy) that the Colour for Non-printing
> characters it is set to light blue by default when the font has the default
> colour (black). If the font colour is not black then the non-printing
> characters are by default set to the selection colour (as suggested by
> Astron) . This can always be overridden if the user selects a specific
> colour.
>
> I think that adding the option to allow the user to select a colour would
> require only to add a new entry in the Options dialog (under LibreOffice >
> Appearance > Custom colours > General) named Non-printing characters.
Please, no. The options dialog is already crowded enough with obscure
options. If blue is hard to see for some users, we need to find a better
color, period. You cannot expect users who find it hard to see the light
blue to find out that an option exists buried somewhere in the options,
only a few experts will; and the bulk of users will think LibreOffice is
a bad program.


Regars

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Milan, all

nalimilan wrote
> I think that adding the option to allow the user to select a colour would
> require only to add a new entry in the Options dialog (under LibreOffice >
> Appearance > Custom colours > General) named Non-printing characters.

Please, no. The options dialog is already crowded enough with obscure
options. If blue is hard to see for some users, we need to find a better
color, period. You cannot expect users who find it hard to see the light
blue to find out that an option exists buried somewhere in the options,
only a few experts will; and the bulk of users will think LibreOffice is
a bad program.
The point here is: the non-printing characters are already set to light blue in 4.3 . Someone already did that
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.3#Light_Blue_for_Non-printing_characters

LibreOffice is NOT a democracy so setting up a vote for another colour won't have any results unless someone actually codes it. But coding another colour without consulting or the agreement of the developer who introduced the change would be a very BAD attitude...

Unless we can convince the author that light blue is not a good option it WILL be set to light blue on the next version.

Personally I would prefer to have an OPTION, than to have some other hard-coded colour.

Just my 2 cents.
Laurent Lyaudet Laurent Lyaudet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi all,

I just set a dudle for this topic. You can vote here :
https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Non-printing_characters_color/

I would like to emphasize that regarding options a) and b) :
- they are "localized" (no need to modify far apart sections of code or
distant functionnalities)
- they belong to the scope of LibreOffice (it's not like asking some
feature that has nothing to do with the goal of LO)
- if one or both is/are chosen, we will still need to have a carefuly
chosen default option
(either some hard-coded value or the color adapting to selection color).

Best regards,
     Laurent


On 30/05/2014 16:33, Pedro wrote:

> Hi Milan, all
>
>
> nalimilan wrote
>>> I think that adding the option to allow the user to select a colour would
>>> require only to add a new entry in the Options dialog (under LibreOffice
>>> Appearance > Custom colours > General) named Non-printing characters.
>> Please, no. The options dialog is already crowded enough with obscure
>> options. If blue is hard to see for some users, we need to find a better
>> color, period. You cannot expect users who find it hard to see the light
>> blue to find out that an option exists buried somewhere in the options,
>> only a few experts will; and the bulk of users will think LibreOffice is
>> a bad program.
> The point here is: the non-printing characters are already set to light blue
> in 4.3 . Someone already did that
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.3#Light_Blue_for_Non-printing_characters
>
> LibreOffice is NOT a democracy so setting up a vote for another colour won't
> have any results unless someone actually codes it. But coding another colour
> without consulting or the agreement of the developer who introduced the
> change would be a very BAD attitude...
>
> Unless we can convince the author that light blue is not a good option it
> WILL be set to light blue on the next version.
>
> Personally I would prefer to have an OPTION, than to have some other
> hard-coded colour.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Light-Blue-for-Non-printing-characters-tp4110478p4110841.html
> Sent from the Design mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Stefan Knorr Stefan Knorr
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Laurent, all,

so, I never came back with a link to the bug (at least not on this
list). It's this one:
  https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79381


On 02/06/14 20:33, Laurent Lyaudet wrote:
> I just set a dudle for this topic. You can vote here :
> https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Non-printing_characters_color/

I am really not sure what you expect from a vote on this. I personally
believe there must be a logical conclusion for this bug, instead of it
being a more or less democratically decided one.

(LibreOffice does have the aim of looking native on the platforms it
ships on. LibreOffice does have the aim of being usable to as many
people as possible [glasses, etc.]. And LibreOffice should have the aim
of not being overly hard to configure.)


Astron.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTjNFcAAoJEJCfzwJOvloO4oQH/0ZIo1iv0sH0FiUBjkX0kWn1
gSnEegT4RrHfIMDCGHJ01W338vRj4Bfh8mcuDFUOU2wt0PAJW39BEpxxGkwdDaLu
TJH3R0WDxvruUSe7Vp3PtRsTtMPiuTRa88N8iuppZYoibzTzG49xPkVzGm/BZGcT
qVYq8tSMmab6YvBzsmbEcXzOHtfT3xcXPxX+WKXsrnxmRkQ7FrnEKkMtTvWNH1r2
CmTRvEtcntAlDQXpNDmvh/q4+LWzIOK44znFBkZsF06uDpSeb8V7shZ106sQ2InG
oJMyEQB4Fu2rTCBhnQYkydedBxq0qrpAKn50jef/CzATOlZj1VFJjIyQbEOWxp4=
=PKph
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Laurent Lyaudet Laurent Lyaudet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Stefan, all,

I expect from a vote to reach a decision that reflects our opinions not
only yours.
When I did set the dudle the situation was :
- a minority of people expressed themselves,
- no decision was reached
Efficiency of the decision process : 0

I see logical conclusions in mathematics (I have a PhD in theoretical
computer science and I know what is a proof and what is not).
When it comes to design I see a lot of contradicting arguments and most
of the time you end up adding "apples" with "oranges" and so on.

You give 3 aims for Libre Office.
Clearly the following solution satisfy your 3 aims : the color adapts to
the selection color by default but there is also an option to choose a
default color.

First aim "looking native" : indeed adapting to the selection color is
appropriate.

Second aim "usable to as many people as possible" : I don't see why
having the choice between colors makes it "not usable".
It seems you didn't understand : "- if one or both is/are chosen, we
will still need to have a carefuly chosen default option
(either some hard-coded value or the color adapting to selection color). "

Third aim "not being overly hard to configure" : it's an option,
somebody who likes the default doesn't have to do anything.
That's not a reason to remove the possibility for others to configure LO
as they wish.
I proposed to have both a and b because I accept that people have
different needs than mine.

Democracy doesn't mean it is the end of reasoning and logical arguments.
As you proved, you gave your 3 aims only after I set the dudle.
There is always logical arguments to explicit but there is rarely only
one logical conclusions.
Most of the time you end up either with no solution that satisfy all
criteria, many solutions, or you have to compare things that cannot be
compared.
That's why I think it's a good thing to accept that different people
have different needs and that in the end you do things for them.

Best regards,
     Laurent


On 02/06/2014 21:32, Stefan Knorr wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Laurent, all,
>
> so, I never came back with a link to the bug (at least not on this
> list). It's this one:
>    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79381
>
>
> On 02/06/14 20:33, Laurent Lyaudet wrote:
>> I just set a dudle for this topic. You can vote here :
>> https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Non-printing_characters_color/
> I am really not sure what you expect from a vote on this. I personally
> believe there must be a logical conclusion for this bug, instead of it
> being a more or less democratically decided one.
>
> (LibreOffice does have the aim of looking native on the platforms it
> ships on. LibreOffice does have the aim of being usable to as many
> people as possible [glasses, etc.]. And LibreOffice should have the aim
> of not being overly hard to configure.)
>
>
> Astron.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTjNFcAAoJEJCfzwJOvloO4oQH/0ZIo1iv0sH0FiUBjkX0kWn1
> gSnEegT4RrHfIMDCGHJ01W338vRj4Bfh8mcuDFUOU2wt0PAJW39BEpxxGkwdDaLu
> TJH3R0WDxvruUSe7Vp3PtRsTtMPiuTRa88N8iuppZYoibzTzG49xPkVzGm/BZGcT
> qVYq8tSMmab6YvBzsmbEcXzOHtfT3xcXPxX+WKXsrnxmRkQ7FrnEKkMtTvWNH1r2
> CmTRvEtcntAlDQXpNDmvh/q4+LWzIOK44znFBkZsF06uDpSeb8V7shZ106sQ2InG
> oJMyEQB4Fu2rTCBhnQYkydedBxq0qrpAKn50jef/CzATOlZj1VFJjIyQbEOWxp4=
> =PKph
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Stefan Knorr Stefan Knorr
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Laurent, all,

> When I did set the dudle the situation was :
> - a minority of people expressed themselves,
> - no decision was reached
> Efficiency of the decision process : 0

Ultimately, this will always be the implementer's decision. Not anyone's
in this team.

Additionally,
1) There is no chance get the majority of [people/users of LibreOffice/
   ..?] to express an opinion on this matter.
2) Do we actually need everyone's opinion? Or would it make more sense
   to find arguments one way or another?

Solving this is best done via Bugzilla with arguments, not via a poll
that will only give skewed, reason-free output anyway.


> When it comes to design I see a lot of contradicting arguments and most
> of the time you end up adding "apples" with "oranges" and so on.

Reasoning on design matters is not (yet?) as clear cut as in
mathematics, true. Still, it should be more than people expressing
random whims.


> Second aim "usable to as many people as possible" : I don't see why
> having the choice between colors makes it "not usable".

Setting a colour that is too light makes LibreOffice less usable to a
large class of users. That is what I meant here, mostly.

But, of course, you are hinting at it... options come at a price. They
increase the complexity of the user interface, they need to be kept
working etc.
The Appearance page of the LibreOffice options in particular is already
a graveyard for far too many borderline useless options.


> you gave your 3 aims only after I set the dudle.

Fair point. Should have done that earlier.


Astron.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTjiVhAAoJEJCfzwJOvloOOkkH+gJQKWte2WWXfmNM+uYxPVWD
qk44GM4WZf/VD1AhQkbqluHPPlwP2QulEqcdjsFhQcUNV6lzjj852AAMk8zlm6+Y
xDT7TQ7RV3OmeSya4ImPNxttdp6xQ01WFtrpUUPvdzHLWB4RZidRjOnouFrsj7wh
0qKbqJ2TFLpilUIr1SBxzHBUk3kgPi1G7gf3wxadf4b6McXj3LC13miNE+086nFP
AKVDMy/YBcd+QyV+Mw90E4i2/i0koeBseNddKFu1aHL899CzMsHlAnfDkee9ARSN
HPaU3FXQ3pTKTyBEyz2bZ+1wLdexavczY+/noEgxLRIp7d4FJOLi5xUovkl60/A=
=8oop
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Laurent Lyaudet Laurent Lyaudet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Stefan, all,

> Ultimately, this will always be the implementer's decision. Not anyone's
> in this team.
So the design team should not take any decision ?
In this respect, whether our decision is based on reasoning or random
thoughts makes no difference.
I prefer to think that the implementer has some sanity and will take
into accounts our decisions.

> Additionally,
> 1) There is no chance get the majority of [people/users of LibreOffice/
>     ..?] to express an opinion on this matter.
The same "no chance" argument apply to all ideals.
That's not a reason to stop doing any effort in direction of these ideals.
Ultimately, I prefer to try and fail than accepting different forms of
mediocrity.
> 2) Do we actually need everyone's opinion? Or would it make more sense
>     to find arguments one way or another?
These two goals aren't contradictory. The goal of my previous mail was
to explain that both are needed.
We need arguments but in the end there is most of the time no unique
logical conclusion,
and that's why we end a democratic debate by a vote in order to have the
more representative opinions we can get.
(Maybe we don't need everyone's opinion but we should try to have more
representative opinions.)
> Solving this is best done via Bugzilla with arguments, not via a poll
> that will only give skewed, reason-free output anyway.
I don't think Bugzilla is the best place for this because :
- you already provide a privileged solution when you open the bug report;
- it can be done by the devs before a decision has been reached.
We need to centralize the arguments in some place : the archive of the
design mailing list does that when you look at a discussion.
We can also put them in the wiki if you prefer.
Clearly bugzilla without the design team knowing it's here is not the
best place.

I don't see why a poll "will only give skewed, reason-free output anyway. "
Can you prove it ?
Do you mean people who vote have no reasoning abilities ?
>> When it comes to design I see a lot of contradicting arguments and most
>> of the time you end up adding "apples" with "oranges" and so on.
> Reasoning on design matters is not (yet?) as clear cut as in
> mathematics, true. Still, it should be more than people expressing
> random whims.
"Yet ?" ? You don't believe in polls but you do believe some day
reasoning on design matters will be clear cut.
Design matters try to satisfy the needs of the people.
If one day we fully understand people needs and how to adapt to these
needs, I hope we should be able to have efficient polls.
>> Second aim "usable to as many people as possible" : I don't see why
>> having the choice between colors makes it "not usable".
> Setting a colour that is too light makes LibreOffice less usable to a
> large class of users. That is what I meant here, mostly.
Ok, you wrote your mail as if your aims were arguments against having
the choice of colors.
I misunderstood you.
> But, of course, you are hinting at it... options come at a price. They
> increase the complexity of the user interface, they need to be kept
> working etc.
The price is not high.
You don't look at the options in a normal workflow.
The complexity of the user interface is marginally increased in some
part that is not often visited.
It's a good example of adding "apples" and "oranges" :
- How to quantify :
-- the gain of usability for some users ?
-- the increase of complexity of the UI ?
- How to compare both quantities ?

"They need to be kept working" : Software, cars, etc. that's quite common.
However, localized features do not need a lot of maintenance.
> The Appearance page of the LibreOffice options in particular is already
> a graveyard for far too many borderline useless options.
There is not that much options there.
I work on a business application that has 10 times more options than
Libre Office.
I do see a problem with the options interface (it is indeed most
noticeable on the appearance page) : The window is ridiculously small
and you can't extend it.
That's why it feels overcrowded there. Should it be full screen and
you'll breath again.

Best regards,
    Laurent


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

mirek2 mirek2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi guys,
So, here's the situation:

This feature was coded as part of the UX Hackfest that took place after
FOSDEM. The dev behind it hard-coded it, thinking that if he had time, he
would tweak it so that the color would change based on what background it's
on. He didn't have time, so the color remains hard-coded. I'm doubtful that
we'll find a dev to implement any sort of smart color mechanism, but it's
likely we'll find one to change the hard-coded color.

Milan is right in that the default should work out of the box for as many
as possible. The right thing to do would be to test various colors, on
various monitors, and on people with varying vision levels. I've contacted
Björn Balazs about it, he said that he'll ponder whether he'll work on
that, though he definitely won't have time until at least next week. If any
of you would like to orchestrate a wide-spread test, that would be
extremely useful. As a start, here's a JSFiddle to play with:
http://jsfiddle.net/mirek2/4D36a/ . Just change the color in the top right
panel to whichever one you propose and click "Run". It might be good to
gather up a few basic hues and then test variants of different brightness
and saturation.

As for the color itself, it should:
* Recede into the background
* Be clearly visible on a white background
* Be distinct from the document content (e.g. please don't use colors from
the LibO color palette)

It might be noteworthy that both iWork and some versions of Office (not
sure if Mac or Windows ones, or both) use blue for invisibles.
BTW, since someone asked before, the reason why gray isn't being used is
because it's very likely that the document contains gray content.

Also, if you find a willing dev, it wouldn't hurt to add this under
Appearance. (This whole section is "advanced", so no worries about
cluttering up Options here. The section will hopefully be moved to "Expert
Configuration" once that becomes usable enough.) However, adding an option
wouldn't fix the issue at hand -- a great default is a must.


2014-06-04 21:25 GMT+02:00 Laurent Lyaudet <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Stefan, all,
>
>
>  Ultimately, this will always be the implementer's decision. Not anyone's
>> in this team.
>>
> So the design team should not take any decision ?
> In this respect, whether our decision is based on reasoning or random
> thoughts makes no difference.
> I prefer to think that the implementer has some sanity and will take into
> accounts our decisions.
>
>
>  Additionally,
>> 1) There is no chance get the majority of [people/users of LibreOffice/
>>     ..?] to express an opinion on this matter.
>>
> The same "no chance" argument apply to all ideals.
> That's not a reason to stop doing any effort in direction of these ideals.
> Ultimately, I prefer to try and fail than accepting different forms of
> mediocrity.
>
>  2) Do we actually need everyone's opinion? Or would it make more sense
>>     to find arguments one way or another?
>>
> These two goals aren't contradictory. The goal of my previous mail was to
> explain that both are needed.
> We need arguments but in the end there is most of the time no unique
> logical conclusion,
> and that's why we end a democratic debate by a vote in order to have the
> more representative opinions we can get.
> (Maybe we don't need everyone's opinion but we should try to have more
> representative opinions.)
>
>  Solving this is best done via Bugzilla with arguments, not via a poll
>> that will only give skewed, reason-free output anyway.
>>
> I don't think Bugzilla is the best place for this because :
> - you already provide a privileged solution when you open the bug report;
> - it can be done by the devs before a decision has been reached.
> We need to centralize the arguments in some place : the archive of the
> design mailing list does that when you look at a discussion.
> We can also put them in the wiki if you prefer.
> Clearly bugzilla without the design team knowing it's here is not the best
> place.
>
> I don't see why a poll "will only give skewed, reason-free output anyway. "
> Can you prove it ?
> Do you mean people who vote have no reasoning abilities ?
>
>  When it comes to design I see a lot of contradicting arguments and most
>>> of the time you end up adding "apples" with "oranges" and so on.
>>>
>> Reasoning on design matters is not (yet?) as clear cut as in
>> mathematics, true. Still, it should be more than people expressing
>> random whims.
>>
> "Yet ?" ? You don't believe in polls but you do believe some day reasoning
> on design matters will be clear cut.
> Design matters try to satisfy the needs of the people.
> If one day we fully understand people needs and how to adapt to these
> needs, I hope we should be able to have efficient polls.
>
>  Second aim "usable to as many people as possible" : I don't see why
>>> having the choice between colors makes it "not usable".
>>>
>> Setting a colour that is too light makes LibreOffice less usable to a
>> large class of users. That is what I meant here, mostly.
>>
> Ok, you wrote your mail as if your aims were arguments against having the
> choice of colors.
> I misunderstood you.
>
>  But, of course, you are hinting at it... options come at a price. They
>> increase the complexity of the user interface, they need to be kept
>> working etc.
>>
> The price is not high.
> You don't look at the options in a normal workflow.
> The complexity of the user interface is marginally increased in some part
> that is not often visited.
> It's a good example of adding "apples" and "oranges" :
> - How to quantify :
> -- the gain of usability for some users ?
> -- the increase of complexity of the UI ?
> - How to compare both quantities ?
>
> "They need to be kept working" : Software, cars, etc. that's quite common.
> However, localized features do not need a lot of maintenance.
>
>  The Appearance page of the LibreOffice options in particular is already
>> a graveyard for far too many borderline useless options.
>>
> There is not that much options there.
> I work on a business application that has 10 times more options than Libre
> Office.
> I do see a problem with the options interface (it is indeed most
> noticeable on the appearance page) : The window is ridiculously small and
> you can't extend it.
> That's why it feels overcrowded there. Should it be full screen and you'll
> breath again.
>
> Best regards,
>    Laurent
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
> unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Mirek, all

mirek2 wrote
I'm doubtful that
we'll find a dev to implement any sort of smart color mechanism, but it's
likely we'll find one to change the hard-coded color.
Since LO 4.3 has reached feature freeze with Beta1 there is no chance to add any mechanism to anything or any configuration options.

The only change (if accepted) is to allow a more visible colour.

mirek2 wrote
Milan is right in that the default should work out of the box for as many
as possible. The right thing to do would be to test various colors, on
various monitors, and on people with varying vision levels. I've contacted
Björn Balazs about it, he said that he'll ponder whether he'll work on
that, though he definitely won't have time until at least next week. If any
of you would like to orchestrate a wide-spread test, that would be
extremely useful. As a start, here's a JSFiddle to play with:
http://jsfiddle.net/mirek2/4D36a/ . Just change the color in the top right
panel to whichever one you propose and click "Run". It might be good to
gather up a few basic hues and then test variants of different brightness
and saturation.

As for the color itself, it should:
* Recede into the background
* Be clearly visible on a white background
* Be distinct from the document content (e.g. please don't use colors from
the LibO color palette)
I believe that for colour blind people (depending on the degree, obviously) light blue will seem like a very light shade of grey, probably not easily visible against a white background.

Maybe the best option is some shade of Orange (e.g. Ubuntu Orange Screen HEX #DD4814 Print C0 M79 Y100 K0 Pantone 1665)...
Looks good on your JSFiddle (excellent tool!)

mirek2 wrote
Also, if you find a willing dev, it wouldn't hurt to add this under
Appearance. (This whole section is "advanced", so no worries about
cluttering up Options here. The section will hopefully be moved to "Expert
Configuration" once that becomes usable enough.) However, adding an option
wouldn't fix the issue at hand -- a great default is a must.
+1 for a great default

Adding options under Appearance has to wait for 4.4 (which will be released in October 2014) so until then if nothing is done all 4.3 releases will have a hard coded Light Blue.

Cheers,
Pedro
Christian Lohmaier-2 Christian Lohmaier-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

HI Pedro, *,

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Pedro <[hidden email]> wrote:
> mirek2 wrote
>> I'm doubtful that
>> we'll find a dev to implement any sort of smart color mechanism, but it's
>> likely we'll find one to change the hard-coded color.
>
> Since LO 4.3 has reached feature freeze with Beta1 there is no chance to add
> any mechanism to anything or any configuration options.

It has reached feature-freeze, but not UI freeze or string freeze.

And late new features are still possible if approved by 3 reviewers
each with different affiliation than the author/the other reviewers
(i.e. not from the same company/group)

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Branches

ciao
Christian

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

In reply to this post by Pedro
Pedro wrote (05-06-14 13:27)
>
> Adding options under Appearance has to wait for 4.4 (which will be released
> in October 2014) so until then if nothing is done all 4.3 releases will have
> a hard coded Light Blue.

I thought about (and mentioned) adding a setting there too.
But on a second thought, I'm afraid it will not make much sense.
 - most of the time people work with dark on light, or light on dark
 - fine tuning for special cases needs a per document or per paragraph
change
 - that is impossible/impractical with the appearance setting
 - so the easiest solution is say 60 or 50% grey
 - full automatic solution needs much more work, but is only relevant in
relatively (very) few situations


--
Cor Nouws
GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28  A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
- vrijwilliger http://nl.libreoffice.org
- volunteer http://www.libreoffice.org
- The Document Foundation Membership Committee Member


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Cor

Cor Nouws wrote
I thought about (and mentioned) adding a setting there too.
But on a second thought, I'm afraid it will not make much sense.
 - most of the time people work with dark on light, or light on dark
If you work with dark on light (the most common use), Light Blue is too pale especially with thin fonts.

I already had mentioned that it was too late for any automated mechanism, but at least a manual option would allow to choose any colour (even black! for those who prefer the old setting).

Too late for that too. Branch 4.3 has reached UI freeze so you can't even add a setting to change it even if you could code it yourself. Light Blue it is.

Cheers,
Pedro
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Pedro,

Pedro wrote (15-06-14 08:12)

> Cor Nouws wrote
>> I thought about (and mentioned) adding a setting there too.
>> But on a second thought, I'm afraid it will not make much sense.
>>  - most of the time people work with dark on light, or light on dark
>
> If you work with dark on light (the most common use), Light Blue is too pale
> especially with thin fonts.
>
> I already had mentioned that it was too late for any automated mechanism,
> but at least a manual option would allow to choose any colour (even black!
> for those who prefer the old setting).
>
> Too late for that too. Branch 4.3 has reached UI freeze so you can't even
> add a setting to change it even if you could code it yourself. Light Blue it
> is.

So you agree with my suggestion (third dash) below?

>>  - fine tuning for special cases needs a per document or per paragraph
>> change
>>  - that is impossible/impractical with the appearance setting
>>  - so the easiest solution is say 60 or 50% grey
>>  - full automatic solution needs much more work, but is only relevant in
>> relatively (very) few situations

Ciao,

--
Cor Nouws
GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28  A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
- vrijwilliger http://nl.libreoffice.org
- volunteer http://www.libreoffice.org
- The Document Foundation Membership Committee Member


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Light Blue for Non-printing characters

Hi Cor

Cor Nouws wrote
> Too late for that too. Branch 4.3 has reached UI freeze so you can't even
> add a setting to change it even if you could code it yourself. Light Blue it
> is.

So you agree with my suggestion (third dash) below?

>>  - fine tuning for special cases needs a per document or per paragraph
>> change
>>  - that is impossible/impractical with the appearance setting
>>  - so the easiest solution is say 60 or 50% grey
>>  - full automatic solution needs much more work, but is only relevant in
>> relatively (very) few situations
At this point that is the *only* viable option. I would say Gray 6 (I can't even find Light Blue as one of the defined colors...).

Another problem is that in addition to making the pilcrow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilcrow) light blue the  font is also smaller, which doesn't help.

Finally: there is a BUG with non-printing characters in 4.3 (a REGRESSION from 4.2) where only the last line of a paragraph shows the non-printing spaces (which can't be noticed if you only test on a single line)... Of course that this is hard to detect since all symbols are so small and light...

Cheers,
Pedro
Next » 12