On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote:
> But having lots of searchable (over the internet) docs is much better.
> For example, I imagine a beginner will run a [google] search for "gEDA
> beginners guide" or "gSchem Tutorial"
There are many gEDA flows. Any particular tutorial is
On 09/10/2011 11:33 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote:
i find that the documentation for creating
hierarchical designs (schematics encapsulated inside a gschem symbol)
is rather scattered so I'm going to start off with that first. If
anyone has already written this please let me know!
I have some
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 10:03:14AM +0530, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 04:42, Markus Hitter wrote:
> > Am 10.09.2011 um 13:35 schrieb Stefan Salewski:
> >
> >> A lot of documentation can be bad.
> >
> > Ha! Now that's exactly the right answer to somebody offering writing
> >
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 04:42, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 10.09.2011 um 13:35 schrieb Stefan Salewski:
>
>> A lot of documentation can be bad.
>
> Ha! Now that's exactly the right answer to somebody offering writing
> documentation.
:)
I agree that too much documentation /can/ be bad - if its in
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 04:20:27PM -0700, Jared Casper wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
> > Using a keyboard to do
> > anything but writing text is a thing of the past, to start with.
> >
>
> I couldn't disagree more. I only want to use the mouse for things
> that a
On 11/09/2011 9:13 AM, "Markus Hitter" <[1]m...@jump-ing.de> wrote:
> But how close is gEDA here? To be honest, I think gEDA couldn't be
farther away. It can't even agree on an equivalent GUI design for both
major tools, gschem and pcb. Instead of doing something about that,
lots of
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 6:09 PM, John Griessen wrote:
> But they both have many of the same low level primitive commands and
> actions.
> I think you could base two apps on the same code and many of the users would
> never know,
> since some are so little into craft and so into speed, they would n
On 09/10/2011 06:20 PM, Jared Casper wrote:
gEDA is as far away from Fritzing as Word is from NotePad.
Jared
But they both have many of the same low level primitive commands and actions.
I think you could base two apps on the same code and many of the users would
never know,
since some are so
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Using a keyboard to do
> anything but writing text is a thing of the past, to start with.
>
I couldn't disagree more. I only want to use the mouse for things
that absolutely require a mouse (drawing things mostly). If I have to
use the mou
Am 10.09.2011 um 13:35 schrieb Stefan Salewski:
A lot of documentation can be bad.
Ha! Now that's exactly the right answer to somebody offering writing
documentation.
Consider the toys from the big company with the damaged fruit: A
reason
for the success of the toys is that documentati
A rating function for the documentations would be handy. I think this
feedback is very important and you get an overview what is good or
bad. Guess, the implemantation isn't tricky.
best regards
Felix
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.
There is a problem that seems to occur often with open source software. Since
it is created by
programmers to scratch their particular "itch", they are more concerned with
the programming and
getting it working to solve their problem. Other than bug fixes that affect
their use of the program, t
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Stefan Salewski wrote:
> Consider the toys from the big company with the damaged fruit: A reason
> for the success of the toys is that documentations seems to be not
> needed.
>
I agree with the idea, but the thing is, the Apple software that
doesn't need document
Very good point! and if I may add: ALL contained in ONE place,
sufficiently reviewed to make it 100% correct with the current version
of the tool(s) it is intended to be use with (and stated in the
document itself).
From my experience, ONE person is accepted as the "book boss" and
On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 13:35 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
> A lot of documentation can be bad.
> Consider the toys from the big company with the damaged fruit: A reason
> for the success of the toys is that documentations seems to be not
> needed.
> A lot of documentation can make people think t
On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 10:19 +0530, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 22:20, Dan Roganti wrote:
> > I wouldn't say wipeout, from looking at the current state of
> > documentation, there's been a huge amount of work done there. I would
> > suggest just making some additions and
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 22:20, Dan Roganti wrote:
> I wouldn't say wipeout, from looking at the current state of
> documentation, there's been a huge amount of work done there. I would
> suggest just making some additions and editing some parts to bring some
> attention to all of the importan
On 09/08/2011 07:01 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
The number of people using it one way or the other would be voted for
> with tutorials written and promoted.
... and create quite some confusion during the process. Does not look
like a good idea to me.
OK, then how about we write it up in your
On 09/08/2011 04:32 PM, Peter Clifton wrote:
Notice there are plenty of single-key bindings there already, for
example, the group at the bottom.
Hope that helps,
Yes, thanks. Maybe I'll create a tutorial based on a keybinding layout
that works smoothly with PCB and see if it is popular.
J
On 09/08/2011 04:14 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
My solution: A titleblock symbol that is really just that. A box, which
contains the title, date, version and author, to be printed on the bottom
of a page. Because these are global attributes, they can be edited wholesale
with the attribute editing
On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 09:19 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > For my money, we could kill "ev" and its menu item completely. I don't
> > think it serves any useful purpose, and has caused me many a headache.
> Full agreement here.
Goodness, I have poor memory. I went to see about this, looked at
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:32:26PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 13:10 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
>
> > gschem is not as key binding configurable as PCB as far as I can tell.
> > Adding that would be a fine goal.
>
> It is actually - its just not immediately obvious.
>
>
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:27:52PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 13:43 -0600, Mark Rages wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Colin D Bennett wrote:
> > > On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:50:33 +0200
> > > Stefan Salewski wrote:
> > >
> > >> For me, I never loved the many tool
John Griessen wrote:
> Another reason gschem would benefit from no-recompile-required key
> binding configurability with action sequences. Besides keys, they
> can go to menu picks or buttons with user language usage hints.
If gschem wouldn't mess with the menu widget, GTK would allow for accel
John Griessen wrote:
> The number of people using it one way or the other would be voted for
> with tutorials written and promoted.
... and create quite some confusion during the process. Does not look
like a good idea to me.
---<)kaimartin(>---
--
Kai-Martin Knaak
Email: k...@familieknaak.de
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:16 PM, DJ Delorie <[1]d...@delorie.com> wrote:
> But now I went to your website and couldn't find any mention of
> this.
The info is here, under "presentations and other info":
[2]http://www.delorie.com/electronics/rulz/
aahh, yes, I see it now, on
> But now I went to your website and couldn't find any mention of
> this.
The info is here, under "presentations and other info":
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/rulz/
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:34 PM, DJ Delorie <[1]d...@delorie.com> wrote:
> I truly believe that you have to take the strict viewpoint of the
hardware
> designers who will be the majority of users -- and not sit back as a
> programmer --- when it comes to laying out a reasonable User
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 13:10 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
> gschem is not as key binding configurable as PCB as far as I can tell.
> Adding that would be a fine goal.
It is actually - its just not immediately obvious.
Look in your $PREFIX/share/gEDA/system-gschemrc file and find:
(define file-k
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 13:43 -0600, Mark Rages wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Colin D Bennett wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:50:33 +0200
> > Stefan Salewski wrote:
> >
> >> For me, I never loved the many tool changes, and I was never able to
> >> remember all the key combinations. "e
Jared Casper wrote:
> I read this comment to mean that the relative scale of the default
> titlebox and default symbol library should be such that if you print
> a page contained within the titleblock out on an A/letter size paper,
> the symbols are a reasonable size. I don't have time to check n
El 08/09/11 16:50, Stefan Salewski escribió:
Yes, a few people including me voted for this for years. That was one of
the reasons for me starting my ruby gschem clone one year ago. Maybe the
wedana html5 clone will support a new user interface?
But for gschem: Some people seems to really love
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:51 AM, John Griessen wrote:
> On 09/08/2011 11:05 AM, Mark Rages wrote:
>>
>> The double keystrokes in gschem are excellent UI. Not as quick to
>> grasp at first, but very very good in practice.
>
> .
> .
> .
> I think gschem has a pretty good interface. I only wish PCB
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Colin D Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:50:33 +0200
> Stefan Salewski wrote:
>
>> For me, I never loved the many tool changes, and I was never able to
>> remember all the key combinations. "er" is edit rotate, "ve" is view
>> extend. For the later I am not
Attila Kinali:
> k...@aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
> > Attila Kinali:
> > > One easy way
> > > to acheive that is to use the first letter of the most commonly used word
> > > for that operation (it does not need to be in every language, just using
> > > english is enough).
> > Don't ever assume
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:50:33 +0200
Stefan Salewski wrote:
> For me, I never loved the many tool changes, and I was never able to
> remember all the key combinations. "er" is edit rotate, "ve" is view
> extend. For the later I am not really sure -- have not used gschem for a
> year.
Don't forget,
On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 20:01:33 +0200 (CEST)
k...@aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
> Attila Kinali:
> ...
> > One easy way
> > to acheive that is to use the first letter of the most commonly used word
> > for that operation (it does not need to be in every language, just using
> > english is enough).
On 09/08/2011 01:01 PM, Karl Hammar wrote:
Don't ever assume that a non native engligh speaker will understand
thoose words or view them as anything else than some random characters
lumped together.
Another reason gschem would benefit from no-recompile-required key binding
configurability
with
On 09/08/2011 11:28 AM, asom...@gmail.com wrote:
I find the two-letter commands to be very fast to use.
They're one of the main reasons why I prefer gschem to the expensive
proprietary program I used at my last job. But maybe that's just
because I'm a vi user.;)
I think the double strokes coul
Attila Kinali:
...
> One easy way
> to acheive that is to use the first letter of the most commonly used word
> for that operation (it does not need to be in every language, just using
> english is enough).
...
Don't ever assume that a non native engligh speaker will understand
thoose words or vie
On 09/08/2011 11:05 AM, Mark Rages wrote:
The double keystrokes in gschem are excellent UI. Not as quick to
grasp at first, but very very good in practice.
.
.
.
I think gschem has a pretty good interface. I only wish PCB used the
same shortcuts instead of the random keys it has now.
Moving g
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 09:22 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
>
> If anyone has some time for planning user interface changes, I have a few
> low level ideas
Yes, a few people including me voted for this for years. That was one of
the reasons for me starting my ruby gschem clone one year ago. Maybe th
ditto...although I only used it for one digital board.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Dan Roganti <[1]ragoo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 09/08/2011 03:24 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
The good part of kicad was, that producing
a PCB is easily possible even if you know no
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:33:51AM -0400, Bob Paddock wrote:
> > we should find textbooks to study on GUI design
>
> Further Reading
And of course not forgetting Shniederman's 8 golden rules of user interface
design, it's pretty concise.
http://faculty.washington.edu/jtenenbg/courses/360/f04/ses
I agree. I find the two-letter commands to be very fast to use.
They're one of the main reasons why I prefer gschem to the expensive
proprietary program I used at my last job. But maybe that's just
because I'm a vi user. ;)
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Mark Rages wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 201
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:34 PM, DJ Delorie <[1]d...@delorie.com> wrote:
> I truly believe that you have to take the strict viewpoint of the
hardware
> designers who will be the majority of users -- and not sit back as a
> programmer --- when it comes to laying out a reasonable User
> I read this comment to mean that the relative scale of the default
> titlebox and default symbol library should be such that if you print
Hmmm, perhaps the default titlebox should be changed then. Let's
commission a multi-million dollar study of thousands of projects to
see what the best size
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 9:32 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> 2. The scales of symbols and borders in existing libraries needs to
>> be workable for A size or letter size paper "out of the box". And
>> the beginner mode should have a create new drawing button that
>> encapsulates this.
>
> There is no su
> I think gschem has a pretty good interface. I only wish PCB used the
> same shortcuts instead of the random keys it has now.
I wish gschem had the same shortcuts as pcb, instead of the random
double-keys it has now ;-) Note: The Lesstif HID *does* suppose
double-key shortcuts, if you want to m
> I don't know who developers of gEDA are, much less what their
> background is.
For reference, I used to design PC/AT motherboards for a living ;-)
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-
> I truly believe that you have to take the strict viewpoint of the hardware
> designers who will be the majority of users -- and not sit back as a
> programmer --- when it comes to laying out a reasonable User Interface for
> an EDA Tool. The OrCad tool was a prime example of this.
I gave a set
I find this instructive, as some of the "problems" you see are just
misunderstandings about how the tools work, indicating that our
documentation and/or tutorials need help?
> 2. The scales of symbols and borders in existing libraries needs to
> be workable for A size or letter size paper "out o
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:22 AM, John Griessen wrote:
>
> If anyone has some time for planning user interface changes, I have a few
> low level ideas of what is stopping development toward "complex
> features with ease of use".
>
> 1. The double keystrokes in gschem need to become single
> strokes
On 09/08/2011 10:03 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
Yes, i know that the workflow is tool dependent, but there are many
tools out there that follow a more or less similar workflow and i think
gEDA should match that as well.
If there is a good reason to deviate from that "common" workflow, it should
be
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 09:22:27 -0500
John Griessen wrote:
> After these low level stoppers, we should find textbooks to study on GUI
> design, compare those
> to Orcad twenty years ago, and copy what is not patented.
Addendum: Try to figure out what your users want, first.
Write down the usual wo
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 09:22:27 -0500
John Griessen wrote:
> If anyone has some time for planning user interface changes, I have a few
> low level ideas of what is stopping development toward "complex
> features with ease of use".
Ah! Finaly someone seeing the light! :-)
> 4. PCB needs an alter
> we should find textbooks to study on GUI design
>From page 540 of the wxBook, that is downloadable online for free.
Actual URL's might need updated:
Further Reading
Apple Human Interface Guidelines: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/
UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/index.htm
On 09/08/2011 03:24 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
The good part of kicad was, that producing
a PCB is easily possible even if you know nothing about the tool.
But getting
to more advanced features was hard to impossible within the time i
tried it.
Now comes the catch:
58 matches
Mail list logo
