I have filed an issue here: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=89694
There is also a possibly-related issue but it doesn't seem to be quite the same. Everything below is cheesy philosophical discussion, which I mercifully left out of the issue report. On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Brian Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote [much snipped]: > [you say that if you] "wanted to use Calc [you] would've double-clicked the > Calc icon not the Writer icon". Starting the application you asked to start and opening files in the software you're currently running are basic UI behaviors present in nearly every application that has been produced in the last few decades of desktop computing. So OpenOffice exists as this huge amorphous blob of office software, but if double-clicking the Writer icon or Calc icon doesn't limit you to using the application that you -wanted- -to- -use- -when- -you- -double- -clicked- -that- -icon-, and if there is only a "single application called OpenOffice", then the separate icons should be removed. Conversely, if OO is going to present it's different modes as separate applications, it should stick to that presentation. It's a problem to pull the old switcharoo at arbitrary points while OO is running. > But there are not separate applications called > Writer and Calc, of course: rather a single application called OpenOffice > that can create and edit documents of different types, including text > (Writer) and spreadsheet (Calc). When you use File | Open..., you are not > doing so from Writer or from Calc but just from OpenOffice. They are certainly passed off as separate applications when you install OpenOffice. The UI's are distinct. The icon says "OpenOffice.org Writer", not "Create a new Writer document". The icon's description is "Create and edit text and graphics in letters, reports, documents, and Web pages by using Writer", not "Create a new file in Writer, and edit data in any of the other OpenOffice components". They are even listed as separate applications on the bug report page. Dubious philosophies are problems but inconsistency is even worse. I would think that a software designer who's feelings on design philosophy emphasize that kind of transparency in software over things making sense to a user (and being consistent with other applications) would also take an all-or-nothing approach when sticking to their philosophy, and be consistent in -all- possible ways. Repeating from that above quote: > edit documents of different types, including text > (Writer) and spreadsheet (Calc). Given that Writer edits text documents and Calc edits spreadsheets, how do the following behaviors regarding the chosen filter type and .txt text files in the open dialog relate to this philosophy? All Documents - Open LF-ending .txt files in Calc. Text Documents (TEXT) - Open LF-ending text documents in Calc. Text Files (TEXT!) - Open LF-ending text documents in Calc. Text Encoded Files - Open LF-ending text documents in Writer. Additionally, how does Writer=CRLF, Calc=LF, fit in? How are the line endings in a .txt file reasonable criteria for choosing Calc over Writer? I made a brief suggestion of alternative filters in the bug report. The current eyebrow-raising philosophy seems strange from the user's end, and inconsistently implemented. > The only sense in which you have Writer or Calc open is that you may already > have another Writer or Calc document open when you go to open your existing > file - but that's an irrelevance. It's not irrelevant. I intended to do something with the software, I was very clear in my intentions (and they were very basic -- start Writer, open document, period) and when I asked it to do that, it did something else. That's a flaw no matter how many layers of philosophy and good-intentioned transparency it is hidden under. It's a flaw in such a basic user process that it's awkward just to have to explain it in such detail. > This philosophy means that - as I understand it - OpenOffice chooses how it > opens existing documents not with reference to which component you think you > are using To correct this, it's the component you actually are using. When you are viewing a document in Writer you really are using the Writer component. You don't just think you are. This isn't the office application matrix we're talking about here. There -is- a spoon. > This behaviour may well be different from that of other office suites you > may have encountered. That doesn't make it good or bad, of course. I enjoy new and creative ways of doing things in a UI to a point, but as far as certain basic behaviors and expectations go, inconsistency with commonly accepted UI practices, in use by nearly all other applications a user would encounter on a given platform, -is- bad. It's bad in that it is unintuitive, and intuitiveness in a UI is important. Another similar problem is IE7's placement of application menus on the right side of the screen, which (even though you eventually must get used to it) becomes more of an inconvenience than anything else, considering that it is currently the only (or one of a small handful) application on that platform with a UI arranged that way. Consistency with existing common application behaviors -is- very important. > For the > avoidance of doubt, I'm not particularly advocating this philosophy - just > describing it. To clear up what I mean, too, I'm not questioning you personally. Design philosophies that lead to confusing user interactions, inconsistency of philosophy vs. design, and inconsistency of UI vs. common UI, are 3 pet peeves that I feel strongly about -- even when the resulting confusion is relatively minor. Joe Smith writes: > I'd rather not have to think about it, so I've just trained myself to use > Insert > File I am training myself to do the same. The need for this training does highlight a flaw, though -- there are some basic actions that should not be associated with learning curves. > The problems with the way OOo manages files have been discussed to death and > there is no traction for changing it. Then, I've gone and removed a lot of things I had typed above -- they've probably already been said better by someone else before. Thanks, Jason --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
