On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 05:27:28PM +0000, John Levon wrote: > > We get complaints on other issues > > So what ? The above is a list of some of the reasons why we might not > get complaints. All of them occur. I know because I personally have both > discovered these being used as reasons, AND done them myself. > > > The last /unmarked item/ would confirm my > > point that the UI is more or less ok. > > Sorry, "more or less OK" does not imply it can't be better. In fact, it > implies it quite possibly could be better.
Sure. But I can't deduce that from the given data, even if there is no reason to believe the opposite. > > If you really want, you can add two or three generic items (undo inner > > level, split inner box, merge adjacent boxes) but I doubt anybody ever > > will use them as soon as he discovered the keyboaerd short cuts. > > If I saw such menu entries I would be completely lost. Hm. Tooltip 'Read section x.y in the Userguide if you are lost'. > I'd just think "what the fuck?". It's thoroughly bizarre and if you > can't see that there's really no point in trying to talk to you about > this :( You seem to assume that any UI different from OO/Word is non-intuitive, misleading etc. Based on what? > Oh, if only I had the resources and time to actually do some proper > lab testing to prove this to you. > > > > The fact that you had to tell me how to do that ? > > > > Huh? > > > > Ah... I am starting to see the light. You did not know that it was > > possible to remove a box without manuall cut&paste? > > I did not. > > > Well, given this restriction, all-boxes is indeed clumsy. Maybe > > that's the reason that this feature was already present in > > Alejandro's mathed... > > > > So why not sit down and try all-boxes usability again? I'd even > > implement the 'cut box' and 'glue boxes' if you felt this would > > help... > > It's slightly better, given that I now know about it being at all > possible. But it's NOT discoverable, and some weird menu item will not > help much. So what are menus good for in general? To find rarely used stuff I suppose. And if I am unsure about an item I just try it out and if the result puzzles me I'll look it up in the man page. [Btw did I mention that we don't have a helpful manpage?] > > > That it's not direct manipulation ? > > > > Direct manipulation? Of course. This removes the innermost box and > > spits its contents into the box above. > > Please look up what "direct manipulation" means. Where? Dictionary? Andre'
