RE: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

I started a discussion a year ago 
(http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/141839) where I wanted to 
make it easier to insert a bibliography that is not in the texmf path because I 
find that for most users this is the common thing to do. I'm still not sure 
where I stand, but I want to bump it to see if anyone has some new thoughts. 

Below is a copy of the last email in the thread in which I summarized the 
arguments and made 5 proposals of changes we could make.

Scott

From: Scott Kostyshak
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 2:21 AM
To: Jürgen Spitzmüller; lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
Subject: RE: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 5:07 AM

John Tapsell wrote:
 If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.

 It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

Good point.

I'm not completely convinced by this argument (although it does sound like a 
good general rule). Without GUI documentation, a lot of the LyX manuals would 
be more like LaTeX manuals.

It seems like there are two workflows of users:
(1) put your .bib files in your texmf path
(2) put your .bib files with your project files

Jürgen, I get the feeling that you do recognize that (2) is legitimate for some 
cases, but that the most common case should be (1) and that people often do (2) 
when they should be doing (1).

So the main question this comes down to is: even though the newbie which we are 
trying to program for does (2) more often than (1), should we make (1) easier 
to do than (2) in order to encourage the user to do what is considered right? 
Or should we make the default the thing that is most natural to him?

I see a few options here:

(a) keep things how they are (and add some tooltips, as Jürgen suggested).
(b) do what I originally proposed which is have two Add buttons. This would 
make (1) as easy as (2).
(c) have a User .bib folder path in the Paths of LyX Preferences. This would 
encourage the good practice of having a common database but the user would not 
have to know anything about TEX paths.
(d1) Have an option to hide databases from the global texmf path and only show 
the databases in $TEXMFHOME (suggested by Jürgen).
(d2) I would tweak (d1) slightly to have the default as showing the databases 
from $TEXMFHOME and the option be to show the databases from the global texmf 
path.

Any opinions?

Thanks,

Scott

RE: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

I started a discussion a year ago 
(http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/141839) where I wanted to 
make it easier to insert a bibliography that is not in the texmf path because I 
find that for most users this is the common thing to do. I'm still not sure 
where I stand, but I want to bump it to see if anyone has some new thoughts. 

Below is a copy of the last email in the thread in which I summarized the 
arguments and made 5 proposals of changes we could make.

Scott

From: Scott Kostyshak
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 2:21 AM
To: Jürgen Spitzmüller; lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
Subject: RE: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 5:07 AM

>John Tapsell wrote:
>> If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.
>>
>> It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

>Good point.

I'm not completely convinced by this argument (although it does sound like a 
good general rule). Without GUI documentation, a lot of the LyX manuals would 
be more like LaTeX manuals.

It seems like there are two workflows of users:
(1) put your .bib files in your texmf path
(2) put your .bib files with your project files

Jürgen, I get the feeling that you do recognize that (2) is legitimate for some 
cases, but that the most common case should be (1) and that people often do (2) 
when they should be doing (1).

So the main question this comes down to is: even though the newbie which we are 
trying to program for does (2) more often than (1), should we make (1) easier 
to do than (2) in order to encourage the user to do what is considered right? 
Or should we make the default the thing that is most natural to him?

I see a few options here:

(a) keep things how they are (and add some tooltips, as Jürgen suggested).
(b) do what I originally proposed which is have two "Add" buttons. This would 
make (1) as easy as (2).
(c) have a "User .bib folder" path in the Paths of LyX Preferences. This would 
encourage the good practice of having a common database but the user would not 
have to know anything about TEX paths.
(d1) Have an option to hide databases from the global texmf path and only show 
the databases in $TEXMFHOME (suggested by Jürgen).
(d2) I would tweak (d1) slightly to have the default as showing the databases 
from $TEXMFHOME and the option be to show the databases from the global texmf 
path.

Any opinions?

Thanks,

Scott

RE: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 5:07 AM

John Tapsell wrote:
 If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.

 It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

Good point.

I'm not completely convinced by this argument (although it does sound like a 
good general rule). Without GUI documentation, a lot of the LyX manuals would 
be more like LaTeX manuals.

It seems like there are two workflows of users:
(1) put your .bib files in your texmf path
(2) put your .bib files with your project files

Jürgen, I get the feeling that you do recognize that (2) is legitimate for some 
cases, but that the most common case should be (1) and that people often do (2) 
when they should be doing (1).

So the main question this comes down to is: even though the newbie which we are 
trying to program for does (2) more often than (1), should we make (1) easier 
to do than (2) in order to encourage the user to do what is considered right? 
Or should we make the default the thing that is most natural to him?

I see a few options here:

(a) keep things how they are (and add some tooltips, as Jürgen suggested).
(b) do what I originally proposed which is have two Add buttons. This would 
make (1) as easy as (2).
(c) have a User .bib folder path in the Paths of LyX Preferences. This would 
encourage the good practice of having a common database but the user would not 
have to know anything about TEX paths.
(d1) Have an option to hide databases from the global texmf path and only show 
the databases in $TEXMFHOME (suggested by Jürgen).
(d2) I would tweak (d1) slightly to have the default as showing the databases 
from $TEXMFHOME and the option be to show the databases from the global texmf 
path.

Any opinions?

Thanks,

Scott

RE: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 5:07 AM

>John Tapsell wrote:
>> If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.
>>
>> It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

>Good point.

I'm not completely convinced by this argument (although it does sound like a 
good general rule). Without GUI documentation, a lot of the LyX manuals would 
be more like LaTeX manuals.

It seems like there are two workflows of users:
(1) put your .bib files in your texmf path
(2) put your .bib files with your project files

Jürgen, I get the feeling that you do recognize that (2) is legitimate for some 
cases, but that the most common case should be (1) and that people often do (2) 
when they should be doing (1).

So the main question this comes down to is: even though the newbie which we are 
trying to program for does (2) more often than (1), should we make (1) easier 
to do than (2) in order to encourage the user to do what is considered right? 
Or should we make the default the thing that is most natural to him?

I see a few options here:

(a) keep things how they are (and add some tooltips, as Jürgen suggested).
(b) do what I originally proposed which is have two "Add" buttons. This would 
make (1) as easy as (2).
(c) have a "User .bib folder" path in the Paths of LyX Preferences. This would 
encourage the good practice of having a common database but the user would not 
have to know anything about TEX paths.
(d1) Have an option to hide databases from the global texmf path and only show 
the databases in $TEXMFHOME (suggested by Jürgen).
(d2) I would tweak (d1) slightly to have the default as showing the databases 
from $TEXMFHOME and the option be to show the databases from the global texmf 
path.

Any opinions?

Thanks,

Scott

insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for the 
most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use one of 
the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if you're not 
used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I was in the 
wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I did not 
recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to Add and 
then Browse.

I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is 
currently Add  Browse. I would propose putting a second Add button below the 
current Add button for the example .bibs.

I'm not sure what I would suggest for the names of the two Add buttons. A few 
options that come to mind for the first one are: (a) leave it as Add, (b) 
Browse (c) Add user bib, (d) Add custom bib. A few options for the second 
Add button are: (a) Add example, (b) Add preloaded.

I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I 
alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example .bibs 
more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their user .bibs in 
the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also contains user .bibs?

Thanks,

Scott

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[John Tapsell]

On 1 June 2012 07:56, Scott Kostyshak skost...@princeton.edu wrote:
 I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for
 the most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use
 one of the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if
 you're not used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I
 was in the wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I
 did not recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to
 Add and then Browse.

 I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is
 currently Add  Browse. I would propose putting a second Add button below
 the current Add button for the example .bibs.

Hi Scott,

  A week ago I posted a list of bugs that I would pay to get fixed.

  If you get anywhere with this, I'll send you $100.  I know it's
pittance, sorry.

John

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Scott Kostyshak wrote:
 I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
 alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example
 .bibs more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their
 user .bibs in the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also
 contains user .bibs?

I do the latter (all my bib databases are in the home texmf path, so they are 
in that list). That's why I wouldn't call this example bibs.

Actually, I think that this should be encouraged. I think most people use 
their bib databases for more than one document, so a common place makes sense. 
Plus, you do not have to care for paths (i.e. when working on different 
machines). So my counter-argument would be that bib databases outside texmf 
should be the exception, not the rule.

As to the GUI: To begin with, I think some tooltips would help a lot.

Jürgen

RE: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: John Tapsell [johnf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:21 AM

On 1 June 2012 07:56, Scott Kostyshak skost...@princeton.edu wrote:
 I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for
 the most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use
 one of the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if
 you're not used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I
 was in the wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I
 did not recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to
 Add and then Browse.

 I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is
 currently Add  Browse. I would propose putting a second Add button below
 the current Add button for the example .bibs.

Hi Scott,

A week ago I posted a list of bugs that I would pay to get fixed.

If you get anywhere with this, I'll send you $100.  I know it's
pittance, sorry.

Hi John,

Thank you for your generous offer ($100 is far from pittance! Especially for 
the small amount of work this patch would require.) but your encouragement is 
more than enough. If this idea is rejected, I'll still go ahead and send you 
the patch.

Thanks,

Scott

RE: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:23 AM

Scott Kostyshak wrote:
 I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
 alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example
 .bibs more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their
 user .bibs in the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also
 contains user .bibs?

I do the latter (all my bib databases are in the home texmf path, so they are
in that list). That's why I wouldn't call this example bibs.

Good point, Jürgen. I now think that example bibs would be a horrible name.

Actually, I think that this should be encouraged. I think most people use
their bib databases for more than one document, so a common place makes sense.
Plus, you do not have to care for paths (i.e. when working on different
machines). So my counter-argument would be that bib databases outside texmf
should be the exception, not the rule.

Excellent point. I'm not sure where I stand on this but your argument is 
strong. Something that I think would still be in line with this good practice 
would be to allow for a personal .bib folder. I would personally prefer to have 
my custom .bibs listed by themselves and not mixed in with the others. Does 
Preferences  Paths have room for another path?

As to the GUI: To begin with, I think some tooltips would help a lot.

Agreed.

Thanks for the comments,

Scott

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Scott Kostyshak wrote:
 Excellent point. I'm not sure where I stand on this but your argument is
 strong. Something that I think would still be in line with this good
 practice would be to allow for a personal .bib folder. I would personally
 prefer to have my custom .bibs listed by themselves and not mixed in with
 the others. Does Preferences  Paths have room for another path?

We have to hook into TeX's kpathsea mechanism (which provides the respective 
paths).

What would be a good idea is to add an option to hide databases from the 
global texmf path and only show the databases in $TEXMFHOME. This would in 
practice do what you want: All bib databases shipped with the TeX distribution 
(the example files) would be hidden and only your own ones shown.

The file bibFiles.lst which is used as input has the full paths, so we can 
distinguish the files. The TEXMFHOME path could be queried with

kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFHOME

in the TeXFiles.py script and stored somewhere. 

Probably the best would be to let TeXFiles.py produce yet another file 
texpaths.lst which holds the results of
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFMAIN
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFDIST
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFLOCAL
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFHOME

Jürgen

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Liviu Andronic]

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Scott Kostyshak skost...@princeton.edu wrote:
 I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
 alone in thinking the GUI is confusing?

Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
rendered more intuitive.

Regards
Liviu

[1] 
https://sites.google.com/site/tsewiki/resources/latex/LyX_Essentials.pdf?attredirects=0d=1

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Liviu Andronic wrote:
 Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
 get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
 step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
 do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
 be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
 rendered more intuitive.

I think we need to improve the documentation. The goal would be to make people 
_not_recommend to access Insert  List/TOC  BibTEX  Add  Browse and select 
your BibTEX database, but to advise them to store the bib files in the TEXMF 
path if there are not any specific workflow constrains which require the file 
to be in the working directory (and explain the advantages of the TEXMF 
location).

Jürgen

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[John Tapsell]

On 1 June 2012 09:40, Jürgen Spitzmüller sp...@lyx.org wrote:
 Liviu Andronic wrote:
 Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
 get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
 step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
 do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
 be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
 rendered more intuitive.

 I think we need to improve the documentation.

If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.

It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

John

Re: insert bibtex bibliography GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

John Tapsell wrote:
 If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.
 
 It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

Good point.

Jürgen

"insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for the 
most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use one of 
the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if you're not 
used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I was in the 
wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I did not 
recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to Add and 
then Browse.

I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is 
currently Add > Browse. I would propose putting a second "Add" button below the 
current "Add" button for the example .bibs.

I'm not sure what I would suggest for the names of the two Add buttons. A few 
options that come to mind for the first one are: (a) leave it as "Add", (b) 
"Browse" (c) "Add user bib", (d) "Add custom bib". A few options for the second 
Add button are: (a) "Add example", (b) "Add preloaded".

I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I 
alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example .bibs 
more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their user .bibs in 
the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also contains user .bibs?

Thanks,

Scott

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[John Tapsell]

On 1 June 2012 07:56, Scott Kostyshak  wrote:
> I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for
> the most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use
> one of the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if
> you're not used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I
> was in the wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I
> did not recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to
> Add and then Browse.
>
> I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is
> currently Add > Browse. I would propose putting a second "Add" button below
> the current "Add" button for the example .bibs.

Hi Scott,

  A week ago I posted a list of bugs that I would pay to get fixed.

  If you get anywhere with this, I'll send you $100.  I know it's
pittance, sorry.

John

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
> alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example
> .bibs more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their
> user .bibs in the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also
> contains user .bibs?

I do the latter (all my bib databases are in the home texmf path, so they are 
in that list). That's why I wouldn't call this "example bibs".

Actually, I think that this should be encouraged. I think most people use 
their bib databases for more than one document, so a common place makes sense. 
Plus, you do not have to care for paths (i.e. when working on different 
machines). So my counter-argument would be that bib databases outside texmf 
should be the exception, not the rule.

As to the GUI: To begin with, I think some tooltips would help a lot.

Jürgen

RE: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: John Tapsell [johnf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:21 AM

>On 1 June 2012 07:56, Scott Kostyshak  wrote:
>> I find that the GUI for adding a bibtex bibliography is not optimized for
>> the most common use: adding your own bibliography. Is it very common to use
>> one of the example bibliographies? I also find that it's unintuitive if
>> you're not used to it and want to add your own .bib. I remember thinking I
>> was in the wrong place when I went to Add and was presented a list that I
>> did not recognize. It took me a little while to realize that I had to go to
>> Add and then Browse.
>>
>> I think that when you go to Add, it should have the same function as what is
>> currently Add > Browse. I would propose putting a second "Add" button below
>> the current "Add" button for the example .bibs.

>Hi Scott,

>A week ago I posted a list of bugs that I would pay to get fixed.

>If you get anywhere with this, I'll send you $100.  I know it's
>pittance, sorry.

Hi John,

Thank you for your generous offer ($100 is far from pittance! Especially for 
the small amount of work this patch would require.) but your encouragement is 
more than enough. If this idea is rejected, I'll still go ahead and send you 
the patch.

Thanks,

Scott

RE: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Scott Kostyshak]

From: Jürgen Spitzmüller [sp...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:23 AM

>Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
>> alone in thinking the GUI is confusing? Do most people use the example
>> .bibs more than their own .bibs? Or perhaps people commonly store their
>> user .bibs in the path so that what I am calling example .bibs also
>> contains user .bibs?

>I do the latter (all my bib databases are in the home texmf path, so they are
>in that list). That's why I wouldn't call this "example bibs".

Good point, Jürgen. I now think that "example bibs" would be a horrible name.

>Actually, I think that this should be encouraged. I think most people use
>their bib databases for more than one document, so a common place makes sense.
>Plus, you do not have to care for paths (i.e. when working on different
>machines). So my counter-argument would be that bib databases outside texmf
>should be the exception, not the rule.

Excellent point. I'm not sure where I stand on this but your argument is 
strong. Something that I think would still be in line with this good practice 
would be to allow for a personal .bib folder. I would personally prefer to have 
my custom .bibs listed by themselves and not mixed in with the others. Does 
Preferences > Paths have room for another path?

>As to the GUI: To begin with, I think some tooltips would help a lot.

Agreed.

Thanks for the comments,

Scott

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Excellent point. I'm not sure where I stand on this but your argument is
> strong. Something that I think would still be in line with this good
> practice would be to allow for a personal .bib folder. I would personally
> prefer to have my custom .bibs listed by themselves and not mixed in with
> the others. Does Preferences > Paths have room for another path?

We have to hook into TeX's kpathsea mechanism (which provides the respective 
paths).

What would be a good idea is to add an option to hide databases from the 
global texmf path and only show the databases in $TEXMFHOME. This would in 
practice do what you want: All bib databases shipped with the TeX distribution 
(the "example files") would be hidden and only your own ones shown.

The file bibFiles.lst which is used as input has the full paths, so we can 
distinguish the files. The TEXMFHOME path could be queried with

kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFHOME

in the TeXFiles.py script and stored somewhere. 

Probably the best would be to let TeXFiles.py produce yet another file 
texpaths.lst which holds the results of
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFMAIN
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFDIST
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFLOCAL
kpsewhich -var-value TEXMFHOME

Jürgen

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Liviu Andronic]

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Scott Kostyshak  wrote:
> I would like to get some opinions on this before I start working on it. Am I
> alone in thinking the GUI is confusing?
>
Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
rendered more intuitive.

Regards
Liviu

[1] 
https://sites.google.com/site/tsewiki/resources/latex/LyX_Essentials.pdf?attredirects=0=1

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

Liviu Andronic wrote:
> Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
> get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
> step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
> do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
> be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
> rendered more intuitive.

I think we need to improve the documentation. The goal would be to make people 
_not_recommend to "access Insert > List/TOC > BibTEX > Add > Browse and select 
your BibTEX database", but to advise them to store the bib files in the TEXMF 
path if there are not any specific workflow constrains which require the file 
to be in the working directory (and explain the advantages of the TEXMF 
location).

Jürgen

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[John Tapsell]

On 1 June 2012 09:40, Jürgen Spitzmüller  wrote:
> Liviu Andronic wrote:
>> Definitely not. When I started using LyX, it took me several months to
>> get to the bottom of how to use BibTeX bibliography. I even wrote a
>> step-by-step procedure in the LyX Essentials [1] (see Section 12). I
>> do not have any specific ideas GUI-wise, but I do think that it would
>> be nice if the entire process of inserting your own citations could be
>> rendered more intuitive.
>
> I think we need to improve the documentation.

If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.

It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

John

Re: "insert bibtex bibliography" GUI proposal

[Jürgen Spitzmüller]

John Tapsell wrote:
> If you need people to read documentation, the GUI is too complicated.
> 
> It should be so simple that you don't need documentation.

Good point.

Jürgen