<div class="gmail_quote">Hi Michel,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Michel Renon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michel.renon@free.fr" target="_blank">michel.renon@free.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Hi Cor, Jan,<br> <br> Le 25/09/12 16:00, Jan Holesovsky a écrit :<br> <br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> [...]<div><br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Therefore the good OpenOffice.org developers and people conducted a<br> large project some years ago, Renaissance.<br> Of course the toolbar is one of the changes the was a result from that.<br> I guess all the work was done, because many obvious actions are not easy<br> enough accessible for Joe-average. And that these were only the first<br> steps in a route to make Impress (&more) more contemporary.<br> The little pop-ups fit more in modern UI (-expectations) I guess then<br> context menu's - let alone short-cuts and pull down menus...<br> </blockquote> <br> I don't think I agree with you here. The touch-based devices need to<br> have everything shown, nothing appearing based on a presence of a mouse<br> pointer;<br> </div></blockquote> <br> It's a technical fact : touch interfaces have no 'hover' event.<br> But look at what's happening with Nautilus : devs are making big changes to prepare for touch interface. The mistake is that they change *current* desktop version so that *future* versions may work on tablets.<br> Since last year, users just can see Nautilus has less and less behaviors. Devs just say "we know what's good for you : we'll bring them back later for touch".<br> The result is that the Nautilus project is forked and will be replaced very soon.<br> We have to realize what for next 2 years (and more...), most LO users will still use a computer (desktop or laptop) to edit.<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Actually, the new version of Nautilus is about as usable on a tablet as the old version.</div> <div>The changes have been brought about after careful deliberation -- you can read about it in-depth at <a href="http://blogs.gnome.org/mccann/2012/08/01/cross-cut/" target="_blank">http://blogs.gnome.org/mccann/2012/08/01/cross-cut/</a>.</div> <div class="im"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> Your modification will be useful for the tablet version of LO, but maybe not for the desktop version.</blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>The on-hover button bar is being removed primarily because it causes frequent accidental errors, not to better suit tablets (although that would be a good reason as well).</div> <div class="im"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div> <br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> and it seems to me as a good trend in general.<br> </blockquote> <br></div> This is a personal and subjective opinion.<br> UI decisions should be taken based on facts, analysis, polls, statistics.<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Actually, I have heard widespread complaints about the on-hover control. I myself have struggled with it.</div> <div>Additionally, if you check the control against our design principles [1], it performs quite poorly. It breaks ux-discovery, since it's not visible by default, and ux-error-prevention, as any clickable buttons that appear unexpectedly over another clickable target is bound to result in errors.</div> <div class="im"> <div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Why not allow users to enable/disable such appearing-controls by preferences ?<br> Everybody should be happy :<br> - beginners and average users won't see changes between versions<br> - power users may choose what they prefer<br> <br></blockquote></div><div>1) It adds complexity (see Hick's law), goes against ux-minimalism</div><div>2) It has to be maintained.</div><div>3) It adds baggage to LibreOffice, makes it slower, makes the code less manageable.</div> <div class="im"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> <br> As a general point of view on this subject, I would say that it shows several problems in the design team (that's why I'm CCing to design list) :<br> <br> - there is a lack of long-term vision for LO's UI/UX : a vision, a roadmap, with tenets.</blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Right now, we're hoping to change LO's UI iteratively, one usability problem at a time.</div> <div>Take a look at our design principles [1].</div><div class="im"><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Some big users (administrations, companies...) need that kind of information so that they can plan training, migration [1].<br> For example :<br> - should we use or avoid appearing / disappearing UI elements ? </blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Yes -- they go against ux-discovery and ux-error-prevention.</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> - should we use floating and/or docked panels ?<br> When a decision is made, it should not change for several years (3-5)<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I disagree.</div><div>If a design has problems, it should be changed right away. It's best for the user.</div> <div class="im"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> - a developer may decide to make big UI changes, just because he talked with few users : it's a complete by-pass of the existing UI process (whiteboards, proposals, discussions, vote)</blockquote><div><br></div></div> <div> That process is for large design changes that need to be thoroughly thought out.</div><div>It would be overkill to spend 3 weeks on minute design changes.</div><div class="im"><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> it may also bring some big inconsistencies [2]<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>It may also bring more consistency, such as in this case, where the on-hover toolbar was unlike any other toolbar in both LO and elsewhere.</div> <div class="im"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> - most important, it may changes/revert recent modifications --> users will be disturbed by those UI flip/flop (for example see previous changes between Rythmbox and Banshee in Ubuntu)<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div> <div> That's pure speculation.</div><div>I personally expect users to be glad to be rid of a usability nightmare.</div><div><br></div></div><div>[1] <a href="http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles" target="_blank">http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles</a></div> </div><br>