On 10:04 Fri 30 Jan , Paul Emsley wrote: > There is (of course) only a limited amount of time that we > (collectively) have to work on the code. There are choices to be > made. Do we add a variety of new features [4] or should we add GUI > access to hundreds of esoteric settings and parameters for people who > don't want to read the manual? Yes, there is merit in providing a GUI > for features to functions and parameters previously only available via > scripting [5,6] but it is often not the most valuable thing we can be > doing "right now". Each setting/parameter we have to decide: is this > useful for a typical user or is this just clutter/esoteric/expert-use-only? > > Having said that, the feature mentioned was added in the early days of > Coot - and if it was done today those extra parameters could well be > brought to the GUI surface.
Thanks for your response, Paul! I understand what you're saying, and I agree that the focus should be on getting "typical" features into the GUI. The difficulty comes with where to draw the line. It may be that each 10% of users has a different set of typical features, so you can never get things perfect without customizing. > [6] we are also aware that there is also the danger of swamping the > GUI with too many dialogs and boxes - making the important things you > need to find quickly more obscure and hidden. I agree that useless choices should not be choices at all. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
pgplCQqGRPGBJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
