[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: paragraph tool
From:       "Elvis Stansvik" <elvstone () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-07-05 11:02:26
Message-ID: 751a4f870807050402r32eeca3aqa0c2f802ce024eb3 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello again.

2008/7/5 Elvis Stansvik <elvstone@gmail.com>:
> 2008/7/3 Thomas Zander <zander@kde.org>:
>> On Thursday 3. July 2008 15:02:48 C. Boemann wrote:
>>> > Yeah, I've been meaning to ask why you think that's a good idea.
>>> > Specifically since we already discussed this and everyone on #koffice
>>> > disagreed that it would be useful.  So why did you commit anyway, did
>>>
>>> you
>>>
>>> > make a big change since?
>>>
>>> Actually I've discussed this with several people on #koffice and they
>>> agreed on the concept.
>>
>> Are we talking about the same discussion?
>>
>> The points where your suggestions fail are multiple; the user needs to
>> manually organize more dockers and has to manually figure out which ones fit
>> together and which ones don't
>> With the suggestions of boudewijn to use a different size or at least a
>> smaller style for the dockers, having multiple tabs will make things look bad
>> since those tabs are from Qt dockers and thus will not use this smaller size.
>>
>> The problem that we detected earlier that its hard to make stuff look good by
>> having a pre-defined ordering gets worse if you make each tool show multiple
>> tabs. Especially if they get added/removed automagically on changing tool.
>>
>> Last; it would be weird that *tools* get the option to have multiple dockers,
>> but most dock-plugins don't. So people may get confused why some tabs can be
>> re-arranged and others can't.
>>
>> As I said, when we discussed this on IRC some weeks ago people agreed with
>> these points.
>> I'd summarize it as "we should design proper dialogs, not get the user to pick
>> up our slack".
>>
>> So, can you please answer my first question?  Why do you think this is a good
>> idea? :)
>> I'd love to be convinced why users are in need to have 3 dockers instead of 3
>> tabs in the tool-options-dialog.
>>
>>> > > Locally I've used that to put the current tabs of the text tool into
>>> > > separate dockers. Well not quite, as I now only have a character docker
>>> > > and a paragraph docker. The style lists are incorporated in these two
>>> > > dockers.
>>> >
>>> > Separate from that, some other devs have been working on fixing some
>>>
>>> issues
>>>
>>> > with the same docker, based on the same IRC discussions :)
>>>
>>> No, i've talked to Aron Stansvik, and he hasn't worked on it, so was just
>>> taking over :)
>>
>> Hmm, I'm disappointed about that :( Aron and I had a lot of design discussions
>> about what the docker should look like. If he doesn't plan to do that anymore
>> I'll see if I can make some time for it.
>
> I'm really sorry. Real Life TM++ :(
>
> I'm having trouble remembering our exact conversations about the
> design, but I do think they were mostly about the issue of focus
> between the style lists vs. the canvas, and not so much (at least
> nothing conclusive that I can remember) about the actual layout of the
> dialogs. I do remember that by the end of the discussions I suggested
> that we use mouse double-click in the style lists to select a style,
> in addition to an "Apply style" button at the bottom of the lists, and
> that you agreed it was a good idea.
>
> I really should start logging #koffice.
>
> Anyway, I was glad when I heard from Casper on IRC that he'd started
> working on improving the text shape options, as I simply have not had
> the time.
>
>> I believe in the design we made there which would work good for the various
>> user groups we focus on.
>
> We should all remember to recognize in the future when a discussion on
> IRC goes into something noting-down-worthy, and then jot it down on
> the wiki or somewhere else, or post to ML. There's too much of "but X
> was agreed on IRC, how can you say Y" on this list :)
>
>> Thanks for your efforts, looking forward to your reasons for splitting the
>> dockers.
>
> I'm not completely appalled by Caspers decision to split them, even
> though the point of more dockers being confusing has some merit. But
> either way, the options needs to go somewhere, and I somehow like that
> paragraph and character formatting are in completely different
> dockers. I think I like that seperation. But this is completely
> ego-centric emotionally speaking.. Need to think about it more..

Sorry I was reading backlog and didn't realize when I sent my mail
that this has now been discussed to death in another thread. I want to
say that at this point I don't care either way, as I don't think a
small thing like this is worth all the heat that's going on, not by
far.

Elvis

>
> Thanks Casper for picking up my slack here.
>
> Regards,
> Elvis
>
> PS. I changed my name to Elvis. DS.
>
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]