>On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 08:04:09PM -0500, Louis Desjardins wrote: >> Is there a problem having this ? la Quark? Basically, with no document >> open (like for font path in Scribus) the changes will affect all new >> documents. When working on a document, the specs can be edited to suit a >> specific need and these new settings will remain attached to that >> document. A dialog will warn you if there are any changes and if you >> want to keep document settings or apply the app settings. > >That's how 1.2.x does it IIRC, and it caused enough confusion that it >was changed in the 1.3.x series. I know the users at work still find the >Quark behaviour confusing even after literally 10 years of use (though >they're not the most computer literate or logical folks I'm afraid). > >There's something to be said for doing it the way some other big player >does it, but in this case I think the Quark approach is rather less than >ideal.
Am I in the right direction saying this can be narrowed to a labelling issue? I think this is mainly what confuses people. I have no problem discovering a new set of tools, a new approach to something or anything different from what we're used to. Only, it has to be clear! From what I read on the list, I see many people having the same concern. It's a "what does what" basic questionning. And I am not ready to throw away the solution the Team came up with at this moment, only the way it's labelled! Words, Words, Words! Edit > Preferences File > Document setup is confusing Would Edit > Application preferences Edit > Document preferences be an option? *Including* the 2 sentences you proposed a few post ago so it is very clear. Some other thoughts, folks? Cheers! Louis > >-- >Craig Ringer >_______________________________________________ >Scribus mailing list >Scribus at nashi.altmuehlnet.de >http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/mailman/listinfo/scribus
