The Sidebar Problem

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
53 messages Options
123 « Prev
Evil Overlord Evil Overlord
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

The issue is not duplicate controls but discoverability. The problem that I have with the Office Ribbon is the extreme difficulty of finding controls, even knowing that they exist. Office 2010+ improved matters substantially by allowing for custom Ribbon tabs. I created a 'useful' tab and put on it all the controls I most use. They duplicate those in other locations, but that's fine.

The sidebar is a useful tool that takes advantage of today's wide screens. To my taste, however, it's most useful as a repository. That is, I'd be happy with an empty sidebar into which I could put the tools I most use. I, for example, would include a Formatting pane including the current formatting tools plus a style control (without which the current pane is largely useless); a Styles pane listing the available styles, and a Navigator pane. These could be stacked vertically or side by side, depending on my choices.

I admit that an empty but configurable sidebar is most useful to sophisticated users, but it bypasses the duplicate controls issue - they are duplicated, but by design and desire.

The solution proposed in the lead post strikes me as being too rigid. Having controls appear only where the designer liked them best is an outmoded and confining choice.

At present, the LibreOffice UI is unsatisfactory. The toolbars take valuable vertical space. The sidebar doesn't include a style control. It's difficult to see the style, formatting, and navigator at once (it can be done with horizontal toolbars, sidebar, and floating windows, but this is a poor solution. This (http://pauloup.deviantart.com/gallery/28216273) is still the closest approach I've seen.
Daniel Hulse Daniel Hulse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

Overlord, I take it you're a power user. Customization is fun, and can be valuable in creating an efficient work-flow in specialized cases. That being said, I don't think it's reasonable to expect most users to have to customize their software. Instead, designers need make interfaces that optimize such things as: ease-of-use, ease-of-learning, efficiency, number of features, and user control for the vast amount of users. This is why duplicate controls are bad, because they make the software harder to learn and understand. As a result, we need to be making decisions about which UI elements are available by default, and which are hidden.

I agree, however, that the sidebar needs to change, and we can learn from the mock-up you linked. Did you see the rough mock-up I posted earlier? Here it is. It's not pretty, but I think it could serve as an inspiration for what a good LibreOffice UI could look like.

Daniel.
Rosmaninho Rosmaninho
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

I just saw that mock-up Daniel. And I think it looks amazing. The concept
is appropriately conveyed.
If something like that would come to fruition Libre Office would gain an
amazing look. And with all the great UI and design concepts that are
appearing in open-source software (Elementary, Gnome, Unity finally looks
and works good, Cinnamon and even KDE with their Visual Design Group) it
would be the perfect opportunity for LO to obtain an UI of its own instead
of the old Open Office one that make it become labeled as the Office 2003
wannabe.


On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Hulse <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Overlord, I take it you're a power user. Customization is fun, and can be
> valuable in creating an efficient work-flow in specialized cases. That
> being
> said, I don't think it's reasonable to expect most users to have to
> customize their software. Instead, designers need make interfaces that
> optimize such things as: ease-of-use, ease-of-learning, efficiency, number
> of features, and user control for the vast amount of users. This is why
> duplicate controls are bad, because they make the software harder to learn
> and understand. As a result, we need to be making decisions about which UI
> elements are available by default, and which are hidden.
>
> I agree, however, that the sidebar needs to change, and we can learn from
> the mock-up you linked. Did you see the rough mock-up I posted earlier?
> Here it is. <http://imgur.com/a/suDhH>   It's not pretty, but I think it
> could serve as an inspiration for what a good LibreOffice UI could look
> like.
>
> Daniel.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-Sidebar-Problem-tp4094331p4105027.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
>
>

--
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

Evil Overlord Evil Overlord
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

In reply to this post by Daniel Hulse
Daniel,

Your mockup looks okay, but I'm a little confused. You say that duplicate controls are bad, but you included duplicate direct formatting controls in your bottom toolbar. For me, the whole point is to shift controls to the sidebar, and avoid toolbars. I don't think there's any problem with duplicate controls, so long as it's clear they do the same thing.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a default sidebar, but make it customizable so that those who wish to can put their own controls where they want them. Far better than trying to divine the correct placement of single controls would be to allow users to create the interface they're comfortable with; the tools I use most often won't be the ones you choose. Most software seems to have headed this way in recent years, and it's a good thing.
Daniel Hulse Daniel Hulse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

Evil Overlord wrote
Daniel,

Your mockup looks okay, but I'm a little confused. You say that duplicate controls are bad, but you included duplicate direct formatting controls in your bottom toolbar. For me, the whole point is to shift controls to the sidebar, and avoid toolbars. I don't think there's any problem with duplicate controls, so long as it's clear they do the same thing.
Those are not in fact duplicate controls. The bottom bar is direct formatting, while the sidebar is stylistic formatting. What that means is that all the controls shown on the right edit the current selected style, while the bottom bar formats the current selected area/where the cursor is--it's contextual, and does not edit the current style. That's why there's no option to choose the typeface or font size there (although you could if you pressed the "more" button which  I now see didn't make it into the mock-up) The idea is that this would make it incredibly simple to edit, define, and apply styles--instead of editing the current style by selecting a style from the stylist and looking through cumbersome dialogues that get in the way of the document. At the same time, editing options that are better done directly--that only have to do with individual words or parts of words--are preserved in the bottom bar.

Evil Overlord wrote
I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a default sidebar, but make it customizable so that those who wish to can put their own controls where they want them. Far better than trying to divine the correct placement of single controls would be to allow users to create the interface they're comfortable with; the tools I use most often won't be the ones you choose. Most software seems to have headed this way in recent years, and it's a good thing.
Customization is okay, but my point is that it has to be limited so that it doesn't diverge too far from the actual design of the software--it needs to happen within constraints. For example, you could rearrange elements in individual sections of the sidebar, or add appropriate elements. You could add whatever buttons you want to the end of the standard toolbar--I for one like to be able enter a formula really quickly, but don't think that necessarily needs to be there for everyone. The idea is that the actual purpose of each part of each element of the ui should not be broken in customization. Meaningful customization is not about radically changing the layout and button placements, or arranging every button in the exact place you want it just for the fun of it--it's about getting to needed functionality quickly. It shouldn't be a substitute for learning how a piece of software works, and allowing customization should not take the place of designing something well in the first place.

I'm not sure what you're talking about about customization in software becoming more common. If anything, the rise of mobile and web apps (which are rarely customizable) suggests otherwise.

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

Re: The Sidebar Problem

The mock-ups posted by Evil Overlord are very nice. But if there's no real
discussion or interest in this board to improve the LibreOffice UI then
this won't change in the near future.
And with the discussion mostly focusing on portraying the Sidebar as a
"problem" instead of a potential way to kickstart an UI evolution I guess
real changes are very far away.

It's a shame that the members of the LibreOffice UI team have no interest
in improving the UI because right now, a lot of other open-source projects
(such as Gnome, KDE, Elementary, Cinnamon, etc, etc) are doing great
innovations in design and UI/UX and LibreOffice as one of the most
prominent open-source projects is completely stagnant in that regard -
prefering to stick to an UI inspired by an outdated piece of closed source
software (Microsoft Office 2003).


On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Daniel Hulse <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Evil Overlord wrote
> > Daniel,
> >
> > Your mockup looks okay, but I'm a little confused. You say that duplicate
> > controls are bad, but you included duplicate direct formatting controls
> in
> > your bottom toolbar. For me, the whole point is to shift controls to the
> > sidebar, and avoid toolbars. I don't think there's any problem with
> > duplicate controls, so long as it's clear they do the same thing.
>
> Those are not in fact duplicate controls. The bottom bar is direct
> formatting, while the sidebar is stylistic formatting. What that means is
> that all the controls shown on the right edit the current selected style,
> while the bottom bar formats the current selected area/where the cursor
> is--it's contextual, and does not edit the current style. That's why
> there's
> no option to choose the typeface or font size there (although you could if
> you pressed the "more" button which  I now see didn't make it into the
> mock-up) The idea is that this would make it incredibly simple to edit,
> define, and apply styles--instead of editing the current style by selecting
> a style from the stylist and looking through cumbersome dialogues that get
> in the way of the document. At the same time, editing options that are
> better done directly--that only have to do with individual words or parts
> of
> words--are preserved in the bottom bar.
>
>
> Evil Overlord wrote
> > I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a default sidebar, but
> make
> > it customizable so that those who wish to can put their own controls
> where
> > they want them. Far better than trying to divine the correct placement of
> > single controls would be to allow users to create the interface they're
> > comfortable with; the tools I use most often won't be the ones you
> choose.
> > Most software seems to have headed this way in recent years, and it's a
> > good thing.
>
> Customization is /okay/, but my point is that it has to be limited so that
> it doesn't diverge too far from the actual design of the software--it needs
> to happen within constraints. For example, you could rearrange elements in
> individual sections of the sidebar, or add appropriate elements. You could
> add whatever buttons you want to the end of the standard toolbar--I for one
> like to be able enter a formula really quickly, but don't think that
> necessarily needs to be there for everyone. The idea is that the actual
> purpose of each part of each element of the ui should not be broken in
> customization. Meaningful customization is not about radically changing the
> layout and button placements, or arranging every button in the exact place
> you want it just for the fun of it--it's about getting to needed
> functionality quickly. It shouldn't be a substitute for learning how a
> piece
> of software works, and allowing customization should not take the place of
> designing something well in the first place.
>
> I'm not sure what you're talking about about customization in software
> becoming more common. If anything, the rise of mobile and web apps (which
> are rarely customizable) suggests otherwise.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-Sidebar-Problem-tp4094331p4106481.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
>
>

--
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
Sean White Sean White
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

I don't think it's that no-one can be bothered so much as it's really hard
to get EVERYONE to agree with any proposed design change.  With a project
this size changing the UI can result in a lot of angry users.  Just look at
what happened to MSOffice after Ribbon.  Leaving aside the arugments of
whether it did indeed change things for ther better, it undeniably changed
them dramatically.  This resulted in lots of hate from people that were
force to change their work flow.  Also was inconvienient to the people who
had to switch between 3 different versions of word.
Leaving aside the angry user for a second, you've also got to convince the
management that this is a good idea.  Then you've got to find programmers
who are willing to make this new design.  LibreOffice uses it's own
internal toolkit with a custom selection of UI elements thus any massive UI
change would require the writing of new UI elements into the toolkit and
probably the rewritting of a fair ammount of old ones.  Not being familiar
with the actual code involved this could take anywhere from a few months to
a year or more depending on how well designed the toolkit is.


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Pedro Rosmaninho <[hidden email]>wrote:

> The mock-ups posted by Evil Overlord are very nice. But if there's no real
> discussion or interest in this board to improve the LibreOffice UI then
> this won't change in the near future.
> And with the discussion mostly focusing on portraying the Sidebar as a
> "problem" instead of a potential way to kickstart an UI evolution I guess
> real changes are very far away.
>
> It's a shame that the members of the LibreOffice UI team have no interest
> in improving the UI because right now, a lot of other open-source projects
> (such as Gnome, KDE, Elementary, Cinnamon, etc, etc) are doing great
> innovations in design and UI/UX and LibreOffice as one of the most
> prominent open-source projects is completely stagnant in that regard -
> prefering to stick to an UI inspired by an outdated piece of closed source
> software (Microsoft Office 2003).
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Daniel Hulse <[hidden email]
> >wrote:
>
> > Evil Overlord wrote
> > > Daniel,
> > >
> > > Your mockup looks okay, but I'm a little confused. You say that
> duplicate
> > > controls are bad, but you included duplicate direct formatting controls
> > in
> > > your bottom toolbar. For me, the whole point is to shift controls to
> the
> > > sidebar, and avoid toolbars. I don't think there's any problem with
> > > duplicate controls, so long as it's clear they do the same thing.
> >
> > Those are not in fact duplicate controls. The bottom bar is direct
> > formatting, while the sidebar is stylistic formatting. What that means is
> > that all the controls shown on the right edit the current selected style,
> > while the bottom bar formats the current selected area/where the cursor
> > is--it's contextual, and does not edit the current style. That's why
> > there's
> > no option to choose the typeface or font size there (although you could
> if
> > you pressed the "more" button which  I now see didn't make it into the
> > mock-up) The idea is that this would make it incredibly simple to edit,
> > define, and apply styles--instead of editing the current style by
> selecting
> > a style from the stylist and looking through cumbersome dialogues that
> get
> > in the way of the document. At the same time, editing options that are
> > better done directly--that only have to do with individual words or parts
> > of
> > words--are preserved in the bottom bar.
> >
> >
> > Evil Overlord wrote
> > > I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a default sidebar, but
> > make
> > > it customizable so that those who wish to can put their own controls
> > where
> > > they want them. Far better than trying to divine the correct placement
> of
> > > single controls would be to allow users to create the interface they're
> > > comfortable with; the tools I use most often won't be the ones you
> > choose.
> > > Most software seems to have headed this way in recent years, and it's a
> > > good thing.
> >
> > Customization is /okay/, but my point is that it has to be limited so
> that
> > it doesn't diverge too far from the actual design of the software--it
> needs
> > to happen within constraints. For example, you could rearrange elements
> in
> > individual sections of the sidebar, or add appropriate elements. You
> could
> > add whatever buttons you want to the end of the standard toolbar--I for
> one
> > like to be able enter a formula really quickly, but don't think that
> > necessarily needs to be there for everyone. The idea is that the actual
> > purpose of each part of each element of the ui should not be broken in
> > customization. Meaningful customization is not about radically changing
> the
> > layout and button placements, or arranging every button in the exact
> place
> > you want it just for the fun of it--it's about getting to needed
> > functionality quickly. It shouldn't be a substitute for learning how a
> > piece
> > of software works, and allowing customization should not take the place
> of
> > designing something well in the first place.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you're talking about about customization in software
> > becoming more common. If anything, the rise of mobile and web apps (which
> > are rarely customizable) suggests otherwise.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-Sidebar-Problem-tp4094331p4106481.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
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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
>



--
Sean White,
Within Temptation - Your Argument Is Invalid

--
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
Teo91 Teo91
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

This post was updated on .
The real issue of LO design projects is that there aren't developers interested in working UI continually. The design team could discuss and provide some interesting mockups, but this not means it will come up someone developing them.

It happened with color picker and with UI easy hacks:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Blueprints
Hundreds of easy hacks, even more complex, were solved by newcomer programmers in the last years, but those small UI hacks are still there with almost none caring about them. I'm not bothering anyone, just saying what are the facts.

Other open-source projects ( Gnome, KDE, Elementary, Cinnamon...) are doing great
innovations in design and UI/UX because their programmers are interested in doing it.
Instead, LO sticks with a 2003 UI until there will be devs willing to work on this topic.

Someone on this list agree about changes, someone not, but what I am saying is that the "stagnant" attitude isn't really a choice, just a lack of manpower to code GUI  innovation.
Teo91 Teo91
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Sean White
Sean White wrote
Just look at what happened to MSOffice after Ribbon.  Leaving aside the arguments of
whether it did indeed change things for their better, it undeniably changed
them dramatically.  This resulted in lots of hate from people that were
force to change their work flow.
That's not the sidebar case: as discussed upper, the idea is to provide an (almost) complete UI aside the existing one,
potentially avoiding any menu browsing. Potentially.
Don't like the sidebar? It's a click away, close it and will disappear as never existed.
Don't like classic UI? Close toolbars and use the sidebar.
Ribbon affected users workflow because they had no choice: "Take this and shut up" - MS said.
We are not doing something similar.

Sean White wrote
LibreOffice uses it's own internal toolkit with a custom selection of UI elements thus any
massive UI change would require the writing of new UI elements into the toolkit and
probably the rewritting of a fair ammount of old ones
No more, not in the upcoming future:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/WidgetLayout/FindDialogs
Over 84% of current dialogs have been converted to the new .ui format who rely on GTK+3 toolkit.
When complete, the plans are (as far as I know):
- convert toolkit used by exstensions
- get rid of hundreds of .rsc files (a .po-like old format used for translation)
- finally port main windows to GTK+3

There isn't an arrival date, but forget LO own toolkit in the future, it will be no more a limitation for a UI change :)

The good news is that the sidebar is indeed a dialog docked on the side and already converted to GTK since LO 4.2
A potential developer doesn't need to learn a weird old technology, neither extending it with new elements.

A sidebar improvement still require time and hard work, but it's notably simpler now.
Another good reason why this is the right way to finally enhance LO visual experience.
Sean White Sean White
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Teo91 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sean White wrote
> > Just look at what happened to MSOffice after Ribbon.  Leaving aside the
> > arguments of
> > whether it did indeed change things for their better, it undeniably
> > changed
> > them dramatically.  This resulted in lots of hate from people that were
> > force to change their work flow.
>
> That's not the sidebar case: as discussed upper, the idea is provide an
> (almost) complete UI aside the existing one,
> potentially avoiding any menu browsing. Potentially.
> Don't like the sidebar? It's a click away, close it and will disappear as
> never existed.
> Don't like classic UI? Close toolbars and use the sidebar.
> Ribbon affected users workflow because they had no choice: "Take this and
> shut up" - MS said.
> We are *not* doing something similar.
>


I think you misunderstood my intent.  My point was to pedro's seeming
suggestion of a massive UI change, or at the very least an abrupt workflow
change.  It's didn't work terribly well when microssoft did it becuase it
DID change peoples workflows too much.  Regardless of personaly feelings of
productivity, massive workflow changes on major products aren't generally a
good thing as MSOffice, Windows 8 and Gnome have all demonstrated.  From
experiences with this mailing list I have a feeling that this is always
going to be a major reason why people won't go with a complete redesign
right off the bat, more a gradual shift towards a design/mockup goal.



>
>
> Sean White wrote
> > LibreOffice uses it's own internal toolkit with a custom selection of UI
> > elements thus any
> > massive UI change would require the writing of new UI elements into the
> > toolkit and
> > probably the rewritting of a fair ammount of old ones
>
> No more, not in the upcoming future:
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/WidgetLayout/FindDialogs
> Over 84% of current dialogs have been converted to the new .ui format who
> rely on GTK+3 toolkit.
> When complete, the plans are (as far as I know):
> - convert toolkit used by exstensions
> - get rid of hundreds of .rsc files (a .po-like old format used for
> translation)
> - finally port main windows to GTK+3
>
> There isn't an arrival date, but forget LO own toolkit in the future, it
> will be no more a limitation for a UI change :)
>
> The good news is that the sidebar is indeed a dialog docked on the side and
> already converted to GTK since LO 4.2
> A potential developers doesn't need to learn a weird old technology,
> neither
> extending it with new elements.
>
> A sidebar improvement still require time and hard work, but it's notably
> simpler now.
> Another good reason why this is the right way to finally enhance LO visual
> experience.



I'll admit that I have been out of the Libreoffice loop lately so this is
both new and exciting.  The custom toolkit always struck me a barrier of
entry to any prospective new contributors. I hope the rest of the
conversion goes well then.


>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-Sidebar-Problem-tp4094331p4107104.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
>
>


--
Sean White,
Within Temptation - Your Argument Is Invalid

--
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
Rosmaninho Rosmaninho
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

Did you even read my previous messages?
I never suggested a massive UI or workflow change so don't go assuming that
I did. Go read my messages here before please.




On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Sean White <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Teo91 <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Sean White wrote
> > > Just look at what happened to MSOffice after Ribbon.  Leaving aside the
> > > arguments of
> > > whether it did indeed change things for their better, it undeniably
> > > changed
> > > them dramatically.  This resulted in lots of hate from people that were
> > > force to change their work flow.
> >
> > That's not the sidebar case: as discussed upper, the idea is provide an
> > (almost) complete UI aside the existing one,
> > potentially avoiding any menu browsing. Potentially.
> > Don't like the sidebar? It's a click away, close it and will disappear as
> > never existed.
> > Don't like classic UI? Close toolbars and use the sidebar.
> > Ribbon affected users workflow because they had no choice: "Take this and
> > shut up" - MS said.
> > We are *not* doing something similar.
> >
>
>
> I think you misunderstood my intent.  My point was to pedro's seeming
> suggestion of a massive UI change, or at the very least an abrupt workflow
> change.  It's didn't work terribly well when microssoft did it becuase it
> DID change peoples workflows too much.  Regardless of personaly feelings of
> productivity, massive workflow changes on major products aren't generally a
> good thing as MSOffice, Windows 8 and Gnome have all demonstrated.  From
> experiences with this mailing list I have a feeling that this is always
> going to be a major reason why people won't go with a complete redesign
> right off the bat, more a gradual shift towards a design/mockup goal.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > Sean White wrote
> > > LibreOffice uses it's own internal toolkit with a custom selection of
> UI
> > > elements thus any
> > > massive UI change would require the writing of new UI elements into the
> > > toolkit and
> > > probably the rewritting of a fair ammount of old ones
> >
> > No more, not in the upcoming future:
> > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/WidgetLayout/FindDialogs
> > Over 84% of current dialogs have been converted to the new .ui format who
> > rely on GTK+3 toolkit.
> > When complete, the plans are (as far as I know):
> > - convert toolkit used by exstensions
> > - get rid of hundreds of .rsc files (a .po-like old format used for
> > translation)
> > - finally port main windows to GTK+3
> >
> > There isn't an arrival date, but forget LO own toolkit in the future, it
> > will be no more a limitation for a UI change :)
> >
> > The good news is that the sidebar is indeed a dialog docked on the side
> and
> > already converted to GTK since LO 4.2
> > A potential developers doesn't need to learn a weird old technology,
> > neither
> > extending it with new elements.
> >
> > A sidebar improvement still require time and hard work, but it's notably
> > simpler now.
> > Another good reason why this is the right way to finally enhance LO
> visual
> > experience.
>
>
>
> I'll admit that I have been out of the Libreoffice loop lately so this is
> both new and exciting.  The custom toolkit always struck me a barrier of
> entry to any prospective new contributors. I hope the rest of the
> conversion goes well then.
>
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/The-Sidebar-Problem-tp4094331p4107104.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
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Sean White,
> Within Temptation - Your Argument Is Invalid
>
> --
> 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
Rodolfo R Gomes Rodolfo R Gomes
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

In reply to this post by Teo91
Teo,

They are/were not converting the dialogs to GTK+ toolkit. They are
just using the Glade dialog layout file format to easier mantainance
and layout edition. =) They will still, AFAIK, stick into VCL, as it
can have backends of differents
widgets toolkit in order to appear native dialogs.

Regards.

2014-05-01 6:29 GMT-03:00 Teo91 <[hidden email]>:

> No more, not in the upcoming future:
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/WidgetLayout/FindDialogs
> Over 84% of current dialogs have been converted to the new .ui format who
> rely on GTK+3 toolkit.
> When complete, the plans are (as far as I know):
>--snip--<
> - finally port main windows to GTK+3
>--snip--<
> The good news is that the sidebar is indeed a dialog docked on the side and
> already converted to GTK since LO 4.2

--
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
Rosmaninho Rosmaninho
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Sidebar Problem

After reading the last previous posts, especially the ones by Teo91 it's
quite easy to recognize that indeed there's a lack of LO developer interest
in coding UI improvements. Which is a shame since LO is one of the
open-source projects with more involved devs.

Nevertheless, I think that that issue is due to the fact that untill
recently the devs had to focus on improving the quality of the code,
porting the dialogs to GTK3, etc - including the Sidebar.
Instead of discussing about axing the Sidebar and cutting down UI options
and affecting the workflow of people who came to rely on it (when I use LO
I use the Sidebar so it would affect me).

Right now, after all the work that has been done on LO, it is the proper
time for the design team to try to increase the interest of devs in
improving the UI, something that has been discouraged untill now because
there were so many other things higher on the priority list. However, many
of those items higher on the priority list have been solved so reflecting
and coding UI improvements is a reasonable prospect.

There's no lack of interest on improving the UI as you can see by the
numerous UI mock-ups for LO in DeviantArt. However, usually those are too
radical.

What the team here could focus on is:
- Coming up with UI mock-ups and ideas on how to improve the Sidebar
(Daniel Hulse ideas are great),
- Show those ideas to a few developers to pique their interest,
- Spread the word around that work in improving the Sidebar is taking place
and that there's interest in drawing in devs to work on UI improvements in
LO through Google+, blogs, etc,
- Maybe hint that there would be a new default UI based on the work done by
the LO dev community instead of relying on the recycled look of Open Offic
​e. Why isn't the work done by the LO devs and team being used as the
default when it comes to the UI? Wouldn't the design team be proud if code
based on your mock-ups would be the default of LO (ex. why isn't the Sifr
icon set the default LO icon set)?​


​However, don't think that I am promoting radical changes in workflow. I am
not. I am talking about improving on what's already available on LO right
now - the Sidebar - and turning it on by default in all the components of
LO. But also keeping the toolbars as an option to the people that don't
feel the need to better use the horizontal space of their displays instead
of the vertical.


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Rodolfo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Teo,
>
> They are/were not converting the dialogs to GTK+ toolkit. They are
> just using the Glade dialog layout file format to easier mantainance
> and layout edition. =) They will still, AFAIK, stick into VCL, as it
> can have backends of differents
> widgets toolkit in order to appear native dialogs.
>
> Regards.
>
> 2014-05-01 6:29 GMT-03:00 Teo91 <[hidden email]>:
> > No more, not in the upcoming future:
> > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/WidgetLayout/FindDialogs
> > Over 84% of current dialogs have been converted to the new .ui format who
> > rely on GTK+3 toolkit.
> > When complete, the plans are (as far as I know):
> >--snip--<
> > - finally port main windows to GTK+3
> >--snip--<
> > The good news is that the sidebar is indeed a dialog docked on the side
> and
> > already converted to GTK since LO 4.2
>
> --
> 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
123 « Prev