To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=85309
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 17 14:26:01 +0000
2008 -------
Well, what you are talking about is pretty loony. Lets examine it more
thoroughly:
> Your dialog suggestion forces the user to a sequential process:
Only, *tabbed dialogs* already force the user to a sequential process. Please
note, that in my suggestion (which is FAR from perfect - only a working mockup),
I added many options virtually non-existent in the current Print-Dialog:
- even/odd/all pages
- reverse pages
- colour/BW/Gray
- shortcuts to frequently used options:
-- A4/A3/Envelope (that is what I use >99% of time)
-- sensible defaults (e.g. for printers)
So, it is unfortunate to say that classic GUIs behave the same, actually are
worse.
> it would be better to provide a UI that offers just the most important
functions
Well, the central pie-dialog does EXACTLY this: it has the most frequently used
functions grouped together (my suggestion still needs some rework, BUT I hope,
it became clear from my post, that this is one feature I highly wanted!).
> My suggestions for a future OOo GUI are:
> - no (modal) dialogs at all
I do NOT fully agree to have as few dialogs as possible. It is sensible to have
few dialogs, BUT this is not always realistic. I print a lot and need often to
change some settings (like A4/A3/Envelope) - believe me, this is cumbersome with
the current Print Dialog/Printer Driver Dialog. having 300+ buttons on the
toolbar is a much worse idea than having dialogs.
HOWEVER, this issue has to do more than just dialogs. The new design works both
with dialogs and other GUI elements to set options.
> - direct object manipulation (i.e. graphics)
Do not really understand what this is about?
> - direct object feedback (i.e. after a AutoFunctions changed something)
[addresses 1., 2., 4.]
1. Does NOT address anything. Existing dialogs use less than 25% of the space to
display data. IF we consider only buttons and other settable elements, than this
is less than 5%. Pretty horrible for an efficient GUI.
2. Travel distance: have still to see a shorter travel distance than between
radially arranged items. (in 2D space not possible ;-) )
4. Why are there NO 2-3 defaults for every list yet? I struggle with a list of
30+ page sizes, although I exclusively use only 3. I have a font list of 100+
fonts, although I use in Calc only one, and in Writer mostly 2-3 (6 with rare
uses of other fonts).
> - layout manager for a dynamically dialog/pane layout
> instead of adding extra space in advance for worst case
> in some languages to the GUI of all languages.
[addresses 1., 2.]
1. there will always be MUCH dead space. I did not notice that, unless I really
began computing the dead space. (measure the area of your buttons and compare it
to the area of the dialog - amazing it is). You will be amazed how much dead
space is in a typical dialog. The only way to make it functional, is to make it
a button, i.e. clickable.
2. Travel distance
a.) Well, mathematically, the smallest travel distance is between segments in a
pie. So it is hardly to devise anything more efficient.
b.) localized text will invariably break the layout of the dialog;
radially arranged text-elements can however expand on multiple
directions, without breaking the primary layout
> - make use of 16:10 aspect ratio of screens ->
> side panes instead of large toolbars on top to improve
> space for the document content.
;-) Sidepane = Dialog
And we start from the beginning. Again, round is better. I also suggest watching
less able people use the mouse. It was a real eye-opener to me, to see them
fighting with the mouse to hit the right button on the toolbar or on the dialog.
Not everyone is an addicted game player, and some people won't ever learn to use
the mouse. This is one ugly certainty.
What did angry me a little bit, is that this issue has been closed as INVALID.
It hasn't been yet discussed on the UX list (although I obviously planed to do
exactly this), it wasn't closed as WONTFIX (which is a viable alternative - no
enough resources to change something as radically as I proposed), but rather as
INVALID.
It even didn't try to analyze the multiple UI-problems I addressed. My proposed
solution might be not the best, BUT it stems from careful observations of people
working with computers, and there is a real problem behind.
I will discuss this issue more extensively on the UX-list at a later time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
