Re: [tdf-discuss] Huge problems with big documents
> LetterSketch is a document authoring tool with which authors can > create documents and extend it with conditions, loops, variables, sub > documents and other ornaments. Sounds like *the* use case where LyX/LaTeX is beyond competition. Because it has all this already built-in. > Finally this template gets compiled to an internal format and finally > it can be generated on a server in high volume by feeding it data in > XML format. Data is best fed from a database (LyX/LaTeX has "native" solutions for this as well). XML was never made for data and it's hopelessly inefficient (both in terms of volume as well as required processing bandwidth) as a format for large amounts of data. > At the customer we created a template/document containing 113 pages, > built up with plain text, various objects like comments and frames, > and dozens of sub-documents and where it takes some 10-20 minutes to > just open the template. 113 pages is not at all a "big" document. Unless that's just the "root" document. > Please find attached the concerning (main) document. This list doesn't allow attachments. Sincerely, Wolfgang -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Scripting for LibreOffice
> While working on my wiki page about a new Writer toolbar, I realized > that independently of my proposal, I believe it makes sense for > LibreOffice to prefer Python. I see how LO is heading in this > direction, but you could be explicit about it, create more workitems, > perhaps track it like you do the German comments and uncalled > functions, etc. It could also be helpful to have a handbook for PyUno... ;-) The point is that a *lot* of users of Python (and there are bulkloads out there) are non-developers who don't give a darn for Java or VBA (because those don't provide what these users need) and who might have never even learned C++. So without specific documentation they're essentially stalled, while with a handbook, you could get a lot of helpers to implement additions in Python. Looks like a classic "multiplier" situation to me. > You may have to support Java for years, but that doesn't mean you > should invest in the language. I wrote almost an entire chapter in my > book about some of the biggest problems with it > (http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=2228). Java is not a scripting language. It was *deliberately* designed and implemented to make interfacing with anything outside the Java runtime environment as difficult as possible (sandboxing). And interfacing easily with anything that has an API is *the* very purpose of a scripting language. Besides, it doesn't offer an interactive commandline interpreter, so you can't really use it for actual scripting anyway. VBA (or the LO/OO dialect of it) is entirely irrelevant outside the locked-up MS world anyway, and especially in the FOSS world. Sincerely, Wolfgang -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Experimental UI for LibreOffice proposal
> I'm working on a proposal for building an experimental new LibreOffice > toolbar / UI in Python: > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:KeithCu Err, I would like to point out the fact that trying to emulate MS in any way is always a B-A-D idea. Especially, but not limited to GUI ergonomics, where MS has been consistently been implementing things exactly the wrong way, from the perspective of the proficient user who knows also something else than MS. Your idea of a "ribbon" turned into a "sidebar" by 90° rotation imho is nothing else than the revival of the old (pre-Windows) Lotus 1-2-3 menu system. Pulldown-menus (and dialog boxes) are a far more advanced concept. Besides the issues with screenspace. A concept that could be a *lot* more useful imho would be to allow tearing off individual (sub-)menus and placing them as floating (or docked if the user prefers that) "toolboxes" next to the workspace. See typical graphics software or e.g. RagTime. When I was working in RagTime (or FrameMaker, but that was more than a decade ago), all I had on-screen besides the document itself and the pull-down menubar above were the listboxes with character and paragraph styles and very few other floating palettes. Sincerely, Wolfgang -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Experimental UI for LibreOffice proposal
> > Your idea of a "ribbon" turned into a "sidebar" by 90° rotation
> > imho is nothing else than the revival of the old (pre-Windows)
> > Lotus 1-2-3 menu system. Pulldown-menus (and dialog boxes) are a
> > far more advanced concept. Besides the issues with screenspace.
> >
> > A concept that could be a *lot* more useful imho would be to allow
> > tearing off individual (sub-)menus and placing them as floating (or
> > docked if the user prefers that) "toolboxes" next to the workspace.
> > See typical graphics software or e.g. RagTime. When I was working in
> > RagTime (or FrameMaker, but that was more than a decade ago), all I
> > had on-screen besides the document itself and the pull-down menubar
> > above were the listboxes with character and paragraph styles and
> > very few other floating palettes.
>
> Hmmm, that sounds interesting. To be honest, I liked the image I
> picked, but I think that when starting, it makes sense to consider
> other designs. If it turns out you don't want a "radically different
> toolbar", then my proposal is a bad idea.
In fact what must be absolutely avoided is to create several different
parallel GUIs ("toolbars" vs. pull-down menus) for the same
functionality. If the "primary" GUI is not ergonomic then fix it. Don't
add another, redundant GUI, this is just confusing.
Use only pull-down menus, but allow them to be torn off as floating or
docked palettes, at the choice of the user. Allow menu items to be text,
icons or any combination of both (icons only is a toolbar then). Allow
the menu contents to be edited by the user. Allow for definition of
shurtcuts for all menu items by users, so that the complete GUI can be
entirely used without ever using the mouse, which is important for
proficient users.
Get rid of those idiotic redundant "assistants", "wizards" or whatever
they are called, since they are just yet another parallel redundant
GUI. Instead, restructure menus and dialog boxes to make them more
ergnomic.
A truely ergonomic GUI is necessarily visually spartanic.
Application GUIs are work tools that have to follow the rules of
ergonomics.
They are *NOT* fashion objects.
Sincerely,
Wolfgang
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Experimental UI for LibreOffice proposal
> Advice: Listen to Wolfgang (earlier posts), whoever he is. Thanks for the flowers. I'm just a "screenworker" who has been producing documents with computers since ~25 years now, on various operating systems (Atari ST, DOS since 3.3, Windows since 2.11, MacOS since 6.0.7, various Unixes etc.) with various applications. The GUI I like the most is probably RagTime (since version 4; minimum waste of screenspace), the functional concept I like the most is that of XML, where I can *enforce* a document structure through a schema and the typographic output quality I like the most is LyX/LaTeX, obivously. Currently, for documents that are input by hand (not generated from e.g. a database) and that are to be printed out, LyX/LaTeX seems to be the best compromise for me. Sincerely, Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] LO Base Enhancements
> I can´tjudge whether your idea is good or not. But I know that there > are around the worldonly two or three developers for base. Pity because Base is (could be?) imho actually *the* "killer" component of LO. For everything else there are other free solutions. In fact I see the rest of LO (Calc and Writer) just as a reporting framework for Base. > It is "inhuman" to demand major changes of these few people. We must > be grateful that these eliminate the bugs. That would be an argument in favour of not re-inventing wheels and instead just ship drivers for client-server RDBMSs while concentrating on the client implementation. Sincerely, Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
