On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 01:19:31AM +1000, Darren Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:13 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> > Correct. Of course, that don't mean the LyX way is the best way
> > everytime. But changing just to "be like others" isn't popular.
> > The change had better be an improvement on its own. LyX has
> > an existing userbase, they don't like change for no reason.
>
> I can't imagine too many people relying on the existing behaviour
> although I don't claim to be that imaginative about what others do.
This particular issue isn't something I worry too much about.
Feel free to change it if it helps. I just warn to be careful with
changes _unless_ there is a demonstrable positive effect.
After all - you were upset that the LyX bolding function didn't work
the way you were used to. So obviously others will be just as upset
at it working differently if/when it changes - unless they too see
it as an improvement. People
who don't use word don't see "word interface compatibility"
as an issue. Backwards compatibility to the previous version
of LyX however . . . We must care for those already using
LyX too.
> > > Try MS Word or OpenOffice.. pretty much pick a mainstream editor of some
> > > kind and it does what I'm suggesting.
> > >
> > I don't use those - mainstream editors are too bad at typesetting.
>
> OK well pick something else with an editor and a bold function. It's
> quite common.
Almost all my formatted text is written in LyX. There is gnumeric
where I use bold occationally - for whole cells only though.
> > The idea is interesting.
> > The big question is - which way is most efficient for the users
> > _once they learn it_. We're not afraid of being different or of
> > having a learning curve - if that makes LyX a better tool for those
> > who know how to use it. The "first timer" experience is less
> > important and shouldn't get in the way of the regular user.
>
> Be careful with that. In my department there is a split between LaTeX
> people and MS word people. Unfortunately I'm stuck on the wrong side of
> the divide and I'm almost always forced into using Word for writing
> papers because others expect to be able to co-author with Word. I am
> sincerely hoping to get some of those people to wake up and use LyX,
> especially my supervisor as it would take off a lot of heat over me
> choosing it for my thesis.
>
Side issue: Why is it so, that when someone expect to cooperate
using word, then everybody have to use word or at least something
word-compatible like openoffice? How about expecting the other guy
to use LyX instead? LyX is free after all - and will happily
coexist with word (unlike what happens if you try using two
email clients at the same time.)
Why is it somehow more ok to force someone to use word, than to force
someone to use anything else?
It is of course nice if the transition from word to LyX can be made
easier. But only as long as it don't get in the way of LyX useability.
> I face two major challenges. Firstly, LyX is comparatively buggy. Most
> of us don't see the bugs any more but try teaching a new user and they
> will see them straight away.
>
This is indeed a problem. Anybody who develop LyX is a power user
that instinctively knows how to work around every quirk. And developers
are volunteers, fixing "little" bugs isnt the most popular work.
Note that word has its share of problems too. Try teaching a new
user to use word someday! Do you ever loose data, do you ever
have word changing the formatting in unexpected ways, might the document
print differently at another site? Just some of the things that
tends to come up when word is compared to LyX . . .
> Secondly, the learning curve is quite steep! Try explaining to somebody
> that the "right" way to type one-point-five-five-microns is to press
> {C-m, "1.55", "\ ", "\mu", " ", C-m, "m"}. They want to know why they
> can't just insert a mu where they want it like in a "real" word
> processor. Then they accept it as an experiment and want to know how the
> hell you worked it out. "Oh I just signed up for [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
I agree that there are many things that could be made easier. But
"word-like" isn't automatically the best way. It might ease the
transition for some. But it don't help in the long run, if it means we
adopt the clunky parts of word too. In word, the TOC can get out of
sync with the document, while in LyX it can't for example.
>From the complaints I see, word
is apparently full of little quirks that word power users mostly knows
how to work around. Just like LyX power user works around LyX
problems. Except that LyX apparently have fewer nasty issues,
it is merely a handful to learn.
When you help out a new LyX user, tell them to skim through the
entire user guide some time. Perhaps after they been using LyX for
a day or two. There they will see examples of almost everything,
and so they will know where to look. It sure helped me many times.
As for user interface design, it is important that the power
user can work unhindered and quickly. The software will never
be a good tool otherwise. *Secondly*, it is also nice if it is
easy to learn. That part is important, but must not get in
the way of efficient use. There is a reason why everybody turn
off the "tip of the day" dialog in software that has such a feature.
One example of good design in LyX: When changing paragraph type
(bullets, numered list, heading of various levels) then you have a
nice pulldown thing that everybody understands how to use.
But a pulldown is too slow for someone who writes several pages an hour
day after day. So there are keyboard shortcuts for these things. Stuff
that you bother to learn once you realize that spending 5 min on looking
up those shortcuts will give a payoff within hours or minutes. Stuff
that you look up once you are used to LyX, once the basic stuff is
easy, so you worry about working faster.
And the same with math. It can all be done through dialogs and menus.
You don't need to know about ctrl+m or "\mu" at all! Those things
are merely speed shortcuts, useful for those that type so much math that
bringing up dialogs is a huge timewaster breaking up their workflow.
The math shortcuts are especially useful for those that comes from
latex, as they know them all already.
Note that there will be some improvements with the soon to be released
LyX 1.5. You will be able to insert a "mu" directly from a math toolbar,
instead of digging deep into menus and dialogs the way you have to
today.
> I think it is very important for any features exposed at the UI level to
> work in the most intuitive way possible. Remember when you were young
> and taught yourself to use a computer.. you pushed everything to see
> what it did. Most people are afraid of doing that after a number of
It is sad when people are afraid of a word processor. Sure, I wouldn't
want to experiment with an important document. But I experiment
a lot - "File->New document" is easy enough, one can then do all sorts
of text-wrecking tests. Or make a copy of the entire document
to experiment on.
> unexpected and counter-intuitive results. That's one reason I think
> those "Cancel" buttons should be renamed to "Close" by 1.5.0 since
> "Cancel" has a well-understood meaning of "undo all the changes I made
> to this dialog", which encourages experimentation. But when it doesn't
> undo the changes... that violates trust like only data loss can.
I agree - that button is misnamed. Fortunately, the menu edit->undo
will still work and avoid the data loss. You'll be hard pressed
to actually get data loss in LyX. I see lots of complaints of the type
"I can't figure out how to do X" but never "LyX ate my 60-page
document". The latter is a problem reserved for the competition ;-)
One gets used to stability - I sometimes leave unsaved documents open
in LyX over lunch, or even overnight. What could possibly go wrong . . .
Helge Hafting
