[Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-design] Future libreoffice.org web page: design request

[Loic Dachary]

> That's absolutely great - and highly appreciated. But before we start,
> I'd like to know whether you are aware of two activities in the past
> that tried to address this issue. First, there has been a discussion on
> the developers list some months ago. Second, there has been an active
> discussion on the German mailing list some weeks ago (but I don't know
> the final outcome).
>
Hi,

I would like to emphasize that I'm a developer with little insight with regard to useability. It's a handicap shared by many developers and I came to acknowledge it over the years.
> My questions are related to the fact, that I already provided lots of
> detailed "usability feedback" within these threads - I assume that would
> be helpful for your work as well. For example:
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-March/009440.html
>
Your mail was my first inspiration when I picked up where Daniel Neel left, back in february ( http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-February/008101.html ). I'm now trying to mix your vision with the one provided by Rainer Bielefeld and Michael Meeks ( which are listed with yours at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Bug_Submission_Assistant#Specifications ).

It would greatly help if I had a bullet list of what should be implemented ( a proper specification is probably overkill, but details would be appreciated ). If there is a consensus on the priorities, it would help my technical work a great deal. I understand, however, that such research takes time and that you are all very busy. This is the reason why I went for a minimal implementation with what I believed to be the parts everyone agrees on.
> There are currently several things that make me ask who are the target
> users for this bug report form? And what is the reason for having such a
> form - improve the quality of bug reports, make it quicker to report
> them, make it easier for less experienced users, make it more visible to
> users that we care about such issues?
My focus is to make it easier for someone who reports a bug for the second time and to improve the quality of the bug report by making sure the essential fields are filled in. The first time someone reports a bug, (s)he will need to register a bugzilla account which is difficult and there is no way around it.
> If we consider "normal users", then e.g. the component selection is
> still very difficult to understand. 
Michael Meeks has a proposal regarding this aspect ( in http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/attachments/20110906/9cc0ddfe/attachment-0001.odt ). If I had the required graphical elements, I could integrate them into the page. Do you know where I could find an image/icon for each components listed at https://bugassistant.libreoffice.org/query.cgi?format=advanced&product=LibreOffice ?
> Or, asking them to create a bugzilla
> account (within this complex system) may reduce the need for a "simple"
> bug report assistant - those people who survive creating an bugzilla
> account are pre-filtered, so that a normal bug report form will work for
> them too (at least the "hide advanced fields" version).
>
I agree that creating a bugzilla account is a major problem. I think nobody disputes this. I assumed the bug assistant was useful anyway because it was listed as a task. If it turns out to be redundant, I would appreciate to know as soon as possible ;-) I will keep going anyway, but I must confess that I'm worried now.

Cheers

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: loic.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 341 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/attachments/20110909/276c9af3/attachment.vcf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/attachments/20110909/276c9af3/attachment.pgp>