On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 04:49:16PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> [I guess you will cut down this list based on 'average', 'likely' and
> 'often'...]
Let's assume I've already done it ;)
john
--
Khendon's Law:
If the same point is made twice by the same person, the thread is over.
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:24:02PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 04:00:16PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > > Please don't - anything an average user is likely to use MUST be in
> > > the main menus.
> >
> > Well, 100 features would most likely end up in a deep menu hiera
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 04:00:16PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > Please don't - anything an average user is likely to use MUST be in
> > the main menus.
>
> Well, 100 features would most likely end up in a deep menu hierarchy,
> won't they?
What are these 100 features average users are likel
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 02:37:53PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:13:10PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > The problem with 'right-click context menus' is that they are not as
> > simple to implement as adding a few lines to ui/foo.ui.
>
> All we need is some function to r
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:13:10PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> The problem with 'right-click context menus' is that they are not as
> simple to implement as adding a few lines to ui/foo.ui.
All we need is some function to return the type of the current inset.
Then we can add lines for each item
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:46:17PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> > I don't agree here. Table and math are even more integrated with LyX
> > than the spellchecker, yet the the spellchecker gets greyed out but
> > math and tables get removed.
>
> This argument would work if the rationale for the contex
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:40:21AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > I have too say that I am not really in love with this menu,
> > but I won't criticize it too hard, since I have nothing better to
> > propose for now. I think that the fact that it appears and disappears
> > contextually is not too
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:26:11PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andre> Jean-Marc, Lars:
>
> Andre> Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove
> Andre> inactive items from the menu instead of graying them o
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> But currently, Edit->Math is non-existent when outside Math.
Andre> Same for Edit-> Tabular outside of tables. I don't think either
Andre> of them qualifies as 'Optional feature'.
Andre> This is annoying for
Andre> (a) new users
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> Jean-Marc, Lars:
Andre> Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove
Andre> inactive items from the menu instead of graying them out?
Andre> I find this horribly bad UI. A user never gets to know the
Andre> 'thi
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:56:10AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> _I_ndex as it used to be
> _L_abel as it used to be
> List/T_O_C as it used to be.
I obviously have more patience than I thought.
> What's wrong with that?
Look again (or even perhaps read what I said ...). Or try it.
I want to
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:22:15AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:44:15AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > Since I am at it I'd like to pursue my 'childish behaviour' as John put
> > it in his comment to #1420: In the new menu structure 'we' changed a
> > lot of short cuts
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:38:26AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >From a quick look this seems to be you defending your decisions, not
> somebody else requesting the change, and certainly not the broad
> agreement 'by the project leaders' you like to cite.
Since when it is necessary for somebody
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:05:19AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> Hey, guess what, I've covered it several times !
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lyx-devel&m=105113183526929&w=2
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lyx-devel&m=105062632809542&w=2
>From a quick look this seems to be you defending yo
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:44:15AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Since I am at it I'd like to pursue my 'childish behaviour' as John put
> it in his comment to #1420: In the new menu structure 'we' changed a
> lot of short cuts in a seemingly randomly fashion, i.e. Insert->Index is
> now - you gue
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 09:57:18AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove inactive
> items from the menu instead of graying them out?
Despite what you seem to think, I am not a moron. I'm entirely aware of
the spatial stability issues with hi
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:12:18AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Jean-Marc, Lars:
> >
> | Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove inactive
> | items from the menu instead of graying them out?
>
> I thought we only did t
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> I find this horribly bad UI. A user never gets to know the 'thing is
> there' unless he happens to check the menus at the right time.
Agree strongly,
Garst
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc, Lars:
>
| Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove inactive
| items from the menu instead of graying them out?
I thought we only did that with "optional items"?
--
Lgb
Jean-Marc, Lars:
Can I please have your confirmation that 'we' decided to remove inactive
items from the menu instead of graying them out?
I find this horribly bad UI. A user never gets to know the 'thing is
there' unless he happens to check the menus at the right time.
Andre'
- Forwa
20 matches
Mail list logo
