Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Thanks all for this great discussion. I close this thread now: there is a nice consensus on not taking the direction of an "expert mode", and that notion was ill-defined anyway. Reading all this feedback, I feel confident that the community will be vigilant and tell me if any new feature somehow disrupts the balance we have between usability / feature-richness. Best, -- Bastien
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:46:16 -0700 Samuel Wales wrote: > I agree with the comments on complexity and inapplicability. IMO it > would be better to arrange existing menus and documentation to > emphasize basics. I think this might be a more productive proposal than having an expert-mode. Also in another post, Joost referred to messages in org-mode. Maybe there could be a verbosity variable that "expert" users could customise if they are annoyed/don't want to look at the messages. Org-mode defaults, as it is right now, facilitates becoming more familiar with the advanced features of org-mode over time. I think we should keep it that way. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Hi, I also agree with Joost and Eric. I don't think hiding the menu on export is a good thing in the long run. Org-mode is a moving target and new things show up in the menu over time -- and I for one would miss the new stuff if the menu was always off. I do however like the 'expert' setting in org-fast-tag-selection-single-key and I think being able to turn sections of org-mode into expert mode is a good thing - but these need to be areas that are not likely to get new functionality down the road that the user wouldn't be aware of. Regards, Bernt "Eric Schulte" writes: > Hi, > > I tend to agree with Joost's sentiments. > > In my opinion the current Org-mode---despite all of the power lurking > just beneath the surface---is entirely usable as a very simple plain > text notes buffer. The user need know nothing more than how to press > tab on a headline to expand-contract it's contents. > > This is how I try to introduce Org-mode to new users. > > "Just think of it as plain text notes, and whenever you realize you >want a new feature, look in the manual... chances are someone has >already implemented it." > > Best -- Eric > > Joost Helberg writes: > >> Bastien and others, >> >> When I worked in Hoofddorp in the early 90's, I travelled 2.5 hours by >> train every day. I reserved half of the train-time every single day >> for a year checking out GNU Emacs stuff I didn't understand on my >> notebook. This helped me a lot in going places (aka major modes, elisp >> code and, later, customizations) I didn't dare visiting before. >> >> The same is true for most of the *Customization* stuff. Seeing things >> beyond your boundaries of understanding satisfies curiosity. Checking out >> stuff you don't completely understand is part of the Emacs journey. A >> journey which is a lot more exciting than any other virtual software >> inspired journey I've encountered. >> >> The creation of an `Expert mode' will make the exploration of new >> features `by accident' or by ambitious curiosity less likely. I think >> introducing an expert mode (is the plain and simple org-mode not >> already quite for experts already?) a bad thing. >> >> Then the semantics of `expert' come around. Expert in what field? >> Organisation? Elisp? Time-clocking? Org-mode key bindings? There must >> be over 5 different experts in using org-mode, which may be even >> overlapping. >> >> Personally I don't mind superfluous messages in GNU Emacs, if any. >> They disappear fast enough and don't appear to slow down things; >> though I might be wrong here of course. >> >> Last, but not least, org-mode users are honest people, at least to >> themselves they are, they must be! Many of them will have trouble >> admitting they're an expert in org-mode; they won't tick the >> box. They'll miss features they would otherwise try. >> >> Org-mode is the best invention since sliced bread and if not, GNU >> Emacs is, keep up the good work! >> >> many regards, >> >> Joost Helberg >> >>> "Bastien" == Bastien writes: >> > Subject: [O] Org expert mode? >> > From: Bastien >> > To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> > Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:05:32 +0100 >> >> > Hi all, >> >> > Org tries to stay as simple/accessible as possible for newbie and as >> > complete/flexible as possible for power users. >> >> > The documentation and the UI are central for this: the documentation >> > should promote core features, document complex ones, and give pointers >> > on how to hack Org -- it does that already IMO; the UI should give >> > access to core features and give hints on complex ones, so that the >> > user can learn more. >> >> > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda >> > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for power >> > users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions >> > that we might document in Worg. >> >> > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when >> > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and >> > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, >> > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we >> > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the >> > complex features. >> >> > This is really just a call for ideas/comments -- I wonder if people >> > already came accross such an idea and and what they think. >> >> > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an >> > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and >> > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features >> > can emerge from the discussion. >> >> > Thanks for your thoughts! >> >> > -- >> > Bastien > > -- Bernt
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On 3/10/11 2:12 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: But I wonder if there are really too many experts as against users whose patterns of usage are expert in one area and noob in others. +1. I've been using a fair number of (what I think of as) Org power tools, including Org-Babel, the Properties API, custom link definitions etc. But with Agenda views, for example, `C-c a a' is just about all I've tried. Someday I'll need more of the Agenda's power and complexity, and when that happens I'd like it to be there, staring me in the face. So while I'm not quite clear what an expert-mode would entail, I suspect it would probably not be something I'd want. Yours, Christian
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Hi, I tend to agree with Joost's sentiments. In my opinion the current Org-mode---despite all of the power lurking just beneath the surface---is entirely usable as a very simple plain text notes buffer. The user need know nothing more than how to press tab on a headline to expand-contract it's contents. This is how I try to introduce Org-mode to new users. "Just think of it as plain text notes, and whenever you realize you want a new feature, look in the manual... chances are someone has already implemented it." Best -- Eric Joost Helberg writes: > Bastien and others, > > When I worked in Hoofddorp in the early 90's, I travelled 2.5 hours by > train every day. I reserved half of the train-time every single day > for a year checking out GNU Emacs stuff I didn't understand on my > notebook. This helped me a lot in going places (aka major modes, elisp > code and, later, customizations) I didn't dare visiting before. > > The same is true for most of the *Customization* stuff. Seeing things > beyond your boundaries of understanding satisfies curiosity. Checking out > stuff you don't completely understand is part of the Emacs journey. A > journey which is a lot more exciting than any other virtual software > inspired journey I've encountered. > > The creation of an `Expert mode' will make the exploration of new > features `by accident' or by ambitious curiosity less likely. I think > introducing an expert mode (is the plain and simple org-mode not > already quite for experts already?) a bad thing. > > Then the semantics of `expert' come around. Expert in what field? > Organisation? Elisp? Time-clocking? Org-mode key bindings? There must > be over 5 different experts in using org-mode, which may be even > overlapping. > > Personally I don't mind superfluous messages in GNU Emacs, if any. > They disappear fast enough and don't appear to slow down things; > though I might be wrong here of course. > > Last, but not least, org-mode users are honest people, at least to > themselves they are, they must be! Many of them will have trouble > admitting they're an expert in org-mode; they won't tick the > box. They'll miss features they would otherwise try. > > Org-mode is the best invention since sliced bread and if not, GNU > Emacs is, keep up the good work! > > many regards, > > Joost Helberg > >> "Bastien" == Bastien writes: > > Subject: [O] Org expert mode? > > From: Bastien > > To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > > Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:05:32 +0100 > > > Hi all, > > > Org tries to stay as simple/accessible as possible for newbie and as > > complete/flexible as possible for power users. > > > The documentation and the UI are central for this: the documentation > > should promote core features, document complex ones, and give pointers > > on how to hack Org -- it does that already IMO; the UI should give > > access to core features and give hints on complex ones, so that the > > user can learn more. > > > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda > > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for power > > users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions > > that we might document in Worg. > > > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and > > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, > > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we > > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the > > complex features. > > > This is really just a call for ideas/comments -- I wonder if people > > already came accross such an idea and and what they think. > > > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an > > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and > > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features > > can emerge from the discussion. > > > Thanks for your thoughts! > > > -- > > Bastien
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Bastien and others, When I worked in Hoofddorp in the early 90's, I travelled 2.5 hours by train every day. I reserved half of the train-time every single day for a year checking out GNU Emacs stuff I didn't understand on my notebook. This helped me a lot in going places (aka major modes, elisp code and, later, customizations) I didn't dare visiting before. The same is true for most of the *Customization* stuff. Seeing things beyond your boundaries of understanding satisfies curiosity. Checking out stuff you don't completely understand is part of the Emacs journey. A journey which is a lot more exciting than any other virtual software inspired journey I've encountered. The creation of an `Expert mode' will make the exploration of new features `by accident' or by ambitious curiosity less likely. I think introducing an expert mode (is the plain and simple org-mode not already quite for experts already?) a bad thing. Then the semantics of `expert' come around. Expert in what field? Organisation? Elisp? Time-clocking? Org-mode key bindings? There must be over 5 different experts in using org-mode, which may be even overlapping. Personally I don't mind superfluous messages in GNU Emacs, if any. They disappear fast enough and don't appear to slow down things; though I might be wrong here of course. Last, but not least, org-mode users are honest people, at least to themselves they are, they must be! Many of them will have trouble admitting they're an expert in org-mode; they won't tick the box. They'll miss features they would otherwise try. Org-mode is the best invention since sliced bread and if not, GNU Emacs is, keep up the good work! many regards, Joost Helberg > "Bastien" == Bastien writes: > Subject: [O] Org expert mode? > From: Bastien > To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:05:32 +0100 > Hi all, > Org tries to stay as simple/accessible as possible for newbie and as > complete/flexible as possible for power users. > The documentation and the UI are central for this: the documentation > should promote core features, document complex ones, and give pointers > on how to hack Org -- it does that already IMO; the UI should give > access to core features and give hints on complex ones, so that the > user can learn more. > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for power > users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions > that we might document in Worg. > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the > complex features. > This is really just a call for ideas/comments -- I wonder if people > already came accross such an idea and and what they think. > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features > can emerge from the discussion. > Thanks for your thoughts! > -- > Bastien -- Snow B.V.http://snow.nl
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Bastien writes: > Hi all, > > Org tries to stay as simple/accessible as possible for newbie and as > complete/flexible as possible for power users. > > The documentation and the UI are central for this: the documentation > should promote core features, document complex ones, and give pointers > on how to hack Org -- it does that already IMO; the UI should give > access to core features and give hints on complex ones, so that the > user can learn more. > > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for power > users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions > that we might document in Worg. > > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the > complex features. > > This is really just a call for ideas/comments -- I wonder if people > already came accross such an idea and and what they think. > > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features > can emerge from the discussion. I've been using org for about a year, and am by no means an 'expert', but it does what I want the way I want it (and I learn more every day). It is in many ways exactly like the surrounding Emacs environment: very powerful, but simple to get started in. I personally see no reason at all to hide any of that power, since as far as I'm concerned it simply doesn't get in the way, and implementing such hiding would be a waste of effort. Regards Robert
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
I agree with the comments on complexity and inapplicability. IMO it would be better to arrange existing menus and documentation to emphasize basics. -- AIDS 2.0 is here now: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com/2010/12/welcome-to-kafka-pandemic-two-forces_9182.html I support the Whittemore-Peterson Institute (WPI) === I want to see the original (pre-hold) Lo et al. 2010 NIH/FDA/Harvard MLV paper.
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On 03/10/2011 05:05 AM, Bastien wrote: > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the > complex features. While I don't consider myself to be an org-mode expert, I have been using it for several years to keep track of appointments, make web pages, take notes, and record grades. I've never found things like the C-c C-e window to be a problem even though 99% of the time I'll do something like C-c C-e h without looking at the window. But I appreciate that window the 1% of the time I do look at it because it shows me that there are features available that might be useful in the future. The window provides an easy opportunity for learning and exploration. If there is a basic mode that somehow hides complex features, then some users may never become aware of those features and what they might do with those features. I've discovered so much because nothing in org-mode is hidden or separated. The manual provides an excellent introduction for new users and it allows them to decide which features they wish to start with, which features they can ignore, and which features they might want to learn about in the future. I think everything should be turned on by default. It is easier for an expert to figure out how to turn something off than it is for the non-expert to turn something on. And I've never found a feature that I don't use getting in the way of my work. Scott Randby
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On Thu, Mar 10 2011, Bastien wrote: > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features > can emerge from the discussion. I agree that it would be a terrible bad idea to add any sort of expert mode. -- Julien Danjou ❱ http://julien.danjou.info pgpmVl7Im82IH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Bastien writes: > >> Bastien writes: >> >>> So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when >>> turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features >> >> More precisely: the UI would not _display_ complex features, which will >> still be available anyway (of course). > > I started using org only last summer, and found it a little daunting, > but reading the intro manual was easier than I thought. There are lots > of complicated features, but I found it entirely easy to ignore > exporting, clocking, and many others. > I completely agree. I was learning emacs concurrently (started on emacs specifically for org) and just ignored everything that wasn't essential. Just navigating files worked. For example, as much as I wanted to learn all the shortcuts for forward/backward one char/word/line/para/heading... the arrows worked and I actually got stuff done. > Looking back, the hardest thing for a new person to learn is the > keybindings for scheduling, priorities, etc. in both the org mode view > and agenda view. > > I don't see where having a mode to turn on and off would help any of > this. I can sort of see the point about the export help, but I type > "C-e C-h h" so fast that it barely blinks by. (Were I still on dialup I > would be cranky.) I'm prone to agree here as well, but maybe it's because I never really used the UI. I just learned the keystrokes as I figured that was the end goal anyway. I'd be open to hearing from other "noobs" or those more recently acquainted whether *they* would find something like this useful. If they are like Greg and I, perhaps learning/usage isn't very hindered by having extras laying around since we just tend to ignore them and use what we learn as we learn it. If anything, having recently started using sunrise-commander, I'm almost more inclined to suggest something like sunrise-x-buttons as more helpful. Provide a cheatsheet for what *is* there rather than hiding what we think new users won't use/care about.[1] > > Overall, I suggest enumerating what changes ought to be made for > non-expert mode, and then seeing if the complexity of having a mode is > really worth it, rather than inventing a mechanism and then looking for > ways to apply it. > Yes -- a clear list would be fantastic. [1] http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Sunrise_Commander#toc2 Best regards, John
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
So maybe different custom functions that are developed to allow people to use ORG in different ways. Some with more help for basic features, some for GTD, some for publishing, some for advanced features or programming. All of the features would always be available but maybe the suggest order for auto-completion or help functions would be different? Matthew On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Rustom Mody > wrote: > > Bastien wrote: > >> I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for > >> power users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find > functions that we might document in Worg. > > > >> So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features > >> and perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned > on, Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e > >> window, do we really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access > to all the complex features. > > > > Org is a large and diverse system and something to help (us perennial > > :-) newbies is always welcome. > > > > But I wonder if there are really too many experts as against users > > whose patterns of usage are expert in one area and noob in others. > > For example consider: Using org for: > > * Brainstorming > > * GTD, mobile org > > * Publishing > > * Literate Programming (via babel) > > * Statistical analysis (spreadsheet, R) > > > > Is it not likely that most people are going to be expert in (at most) > > a few of these and not really expert in the others? > > I completely agree - and that is the direction my suggestion is aiming at. > Somebody using org mode for literate programming might be an expert in > literal programming with R, but no idea (yet?) about GTD and mobile > org. > So a system which provides usage pattern specific menues and enabled / > disabled functions, would be from my point of view the perfect > solutions. > And if this could be set on a file basis, that would even be better. > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > -- > NEW GERMAN FAX NUMBER!!! > > Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation > Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) > > Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology > Natural Sciences Building > Office Suite 2039 > Stellenbosch University > Main Campus, Merriman Avenue > Stellenbosch > South Africa > > Cell: +27 - (0)83 9479 042 > Fax:+27 - (0)86 516 2782 > Fax:+49 - (0)321 2125 2244 > email: rai...@krugs.de > > Skype: RMkrug > Google: r.m.k...@gmail.com > >
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > Bastien wrote: >> I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda actions >> (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for >> power users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions >> that we might document in Worg. > >> So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when turned >> off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features >> and perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, >> Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e >> window, do we really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to >> all the complex features. > > Org is a large and diverse system and something to help (us perennial > :-) newbies is always welcome. > > But I wonder if there are really too many experts as against users > whose patterns of usage are expert in one area and noob in others. > For example consider: Using org for: > * Brainstorming > * GTD, mobile org > * Publishing > * Literate Programming (via babel) > * Statistical analysis (spreadsheet, R) > > Is it not likely that most people are going to be expert in (at most) > a few of these and not really expert in the others? I completely agree - and that is the direction my suggestion is aiming at. Somebody using org mode for literate programming might be an expert in literal programming with R, but no idea (yet?) about GTD and mobile org. So a system which provides usage pattern specific menues and enabled / disabled functions, would be from my point of view the perfect solutions. And if this could be set on a file basis, that would even be better. Rainer > > -- NEW GERMAN FAX NUMBER!!! Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Natural Sciences Building Office Suite 2039 Stellenbosch University Main Campus, Merriman Avenue Stellenbosch South Africa Cell: +27 - (0)83 9479 042 Fax: +27 - (0)86 516 2782 Fax: +49 - (0)321 2125 2244 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug Google: r.m.k...@gmail.com
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Bastien wrote: > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda actions > (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for > power users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions > that we might document in Worg. > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when turned > off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features > and perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, Org > would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e > window, do we really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all > the complex features. Org is a large and diverse system and something to help (us perennial :-) newbies is always welcome. But I wonder if there are really too many experts as against users whose patterns of usage are expert in one area and noob in others. For example consider: Using org for: * Brainstorming * GTD, mobile org * Publishing * Literate Programming (via babel) * Statistical analysis (spreadsheet, R) Is it not likely that most people are going to be expert in (at most) a few of these and not really expert in the others?
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Bastien writes: > Bastien writes: > >> So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when >> turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features > > More precisely: the UI would not _display_ complex features, which will > still be available anyway (of course). I started using org only last summer, and found it a little daunting, but reading the intro manual was easier than I thought. There are lots of complicated features, but I found it entirely easy to ignore exporting, clocking, and many others. Looking back, the hardest thing for a new person to learn is the keybindings for scheduling, priorities, etc. in both the org mode view and agenda view. I don't see where having a mode to turn on and off would help any of this. I can sort of see the point about the export help, but I type "C-e C-h h" so fast that it barely blinks by. (Were I still on dialup I would be cranky.) Overall, I suggest enumerating what changes ought to be made for non-expert mode, and then seeing if the complexity of having a mode is really worth it, rather than inventing a mechanism and then looking for ways to apply it. pgpx8A6qbxhVI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Bastien wrote: > Bastien writes: > >> So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when >> turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features > > More precisely: the UI would not _display_ complex features, which will > still be available anyway (of course). I think it would be an excellent idea. One could have even more modes, e.g. babel. This would make working (especially starting) much easier. Although I mus say, I started without the UI - I only use the menu for tables and other things I do not that often. But following on your statement that the features will still be there, I would actually suggest to introduce an "Org Babel Mode" which would *disable* features like archiving - the archiving feature (very useful for time management et al) is quite useless in the use of babel for literate programming. This "Org Babel mode" should not be a mode for the whole of org, but rather on a per file basis. One could define certain base modes (like the mentioned "Org Babel mode") and allow the user to define new ones. The activation of two modes, would enable all functionality which is enabled in one of the modes, while disabling the ones disabled in both or not enabled in one. Cheers, Rainer > > -- > Bastien > > -- NEW GERMAN FAX NUMBER!!! Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Natural Sciences Building Office Suite 2039 Stellenbosch University Main Campus, Merriman Avenue Stellenbosch South Africa Cell: +27 - (0)83 9479 042 Fax: +27 - (0)86 516 2782 Fax: +49 - (0)321 2125 2244 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug Google: r.m.k...@gmail.com
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
I wonder about the complexity associated with adding an expert mode. My area is design, and one of my pet peeves about all things designed is how they tend to increase in complexity for the sake of extending their scope, without much attention being paid to the brittleness that accumulates collaterally. Since complexity is a non-linear thing, adding even one time element can increase it, and brittleness, significantly. I think - and I would suggest - that it can all be done with documentation. That is, one can lay out doc so that the complex things just aren't staring one in the face. If the doc were properly designed, users just wouldn't know about the 'power' stuff and so wouldn't be prone to getting overwhelmed by it. And this keeps the code itself less complex. I even think this applies to the matter of more compact messaging. Just a thought. Cheers. Fil On 10 March 2011 05:05, Bastien wrote: > Hi all, > > Org tries to stay as simple/accessible as possible for newbie and as > complete/flexible as possible for power users. > > The documentation and the UI are central for this: the documentation > should promote core features, document complex ones, and give pointers > on how to hack Org -- it does that already IMO; the UI should give > access to core features and give hints on complex ones, so that the > user can learn more. > > I've just added the ability to run a custom function for bulk agenda > actions (thanks to Puneeth for the patch!) This is clearly for power > users -- or those who are willing to take the time to find functions > that we might document in Worg. > > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features and > perhaps display more helpful messages on simple ones; when turned on, > Org would have a less verbose UI (think of the C-c C-e window, do we > really want to *read* it all the times?) and give access to all the > complex features. > > This is really just a call for ideas/comments -- I wonder if people > already came accross such an idea and and what they think. > > I'm myself not convinced: it's a good thing that Org doesn't need an > Expert mode so far, it means newbies are not confused by the UI, and > experts are not frustrated by it either. But I expect neat features > can emerge from the discussion. > > Thanks for your thoughts! > > -- > Bastien > > -- Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng. Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Ryerson University 350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749 Fax: 416/979-5265 Email: salus...@ryerson.ca http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
Re: [O] Org expert mode?
Bastien writes: > So I naturally thought of something like an "Org Expert mode": when > turned off, the UI would *not* give access to complex features More precisely: the UI would not _display_ complex features, which will still be available anyway (of course). -- Bastien
