[O-T]: Re: menu structure

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Christian Ridderström wrote: > Cheers, > Konrad (off for lunch to Quantum) Way late, but... was that the restaurant at KTH, Stockholm? Indeed. I am still at S3. Small world (I did my PhD there). Wonder how LyX users there are at KTH these day

Re: menu structure

Christian Ridderström wrote: Cheers, Konrad (off for lunch to Quantum) Way late, but... was that the restaurant at KTH, Stockholm? Indeed. I am still at S3. /Konrad

Re: menu structure

Cheers, Konrad (off for lunch to Quantum) Way late, but... was that the restaurant at KTH, Stockholm? /Christian -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: menu structure

Christian Ridderström wrote: On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: I (sort of) came to the conclusion though that it is too late for 1.6 anyhow (especially in terms of documentation). Am I right with that? No idea about that, but the documentation could certainly be an issue. In gener

Re: menu structure

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: I (sort of) came to the conclusion though that it is too late for 1.6 anyhow (especially in terms of documentation). Am I right with that? No idea about that, but the documentation could certainly be an issue. In general, I think we should be caref

Re: menu structure

Christian Ridderström wrote: Having said the above and sounding negative, No, not at all!!! A different perspective ... I think it's great that you are looking at menu structure in a structured way! I (sort of) came to the conclusion though that it is too late for 1.6 anyhow (especially in

Re: menu structure

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008, Helge Hafting wrote: Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Can you point to a program where _all_ document-level settings are in > File menu? We shall not over-interpret the HIG. I do not have much to compare to by hand, only OO 2.3 and Word 2003. Word

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Can you point to a program where _all_ document-level settings are in File menu? We shall not over-interpret the HIG. I do not have much to compare to by hand, only OO 2.3 and Word 2003. Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properti

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Edwin (and others), great thanks for starting to work on this! I have a number of suggestions for changes, strictly based on the HIG [1] (except those sentences starting with IMO). If something is left open by the HIG, I refer to what I assume are applications that well

Re: menu structure

> Format. Probably at the top. > +1

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > Example: The document settings do not apply to the whole book if I click > onto Document Settings while I am in a child document - something that > is not obvious. Right. However, there are cases where you want to have different settings in a child document (if you compil

Re: menu structure

Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Can you please (honestly) explain this distinction to me (or define)? I feel like I am missing something here ... I didn't follow this exact discussion, but if you think of a book that consists of a master file and several childs, the document would be the whole (the

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: > > just to give some feedback the file/document distinction to me as a user > > is quite clear > > Can you please (honestly) explain this distinction to me (or define)? > I feel like I am missing something here ... I didn't follow this exact discussion,

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> This is why, while I really dislike things like Document settings in >> File menu, I am a bit embarrassed to criticize you choices. But I'll >> find a way around it ;) [*] > > If we assume (for a moment) that there is no D

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: This is why, while I really dislike things like Document settings in File menu, I am a bit embarrassed to criticize you choices. But I'll find a way around it ;) [*] If we assume (for a moment) that there is no Document-menu, where would you

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: This is why, while I really dislike things like Document settings in File menu, I am a bit embarrassed to criticize you choices. But I'll find a way around it ;) [*] If we assume (for a moment) that there is no Document-menu, where would you put the Document Setting

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And my impression from the earlier thread was that we should build > something based on HIGs, e.g., > > JMarc: "the menu structure should be done after > looking at as many HIG and good quality mainstream programs as > possible." > > JMarc again: "We ca

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > Not sure how we proceed from here. hmm if we are in black hole, then lets try to get little back in the discussion. what was the reason to the menu change? imho the fact that users(=we) are discontent with the current menu. so the first thing, the end result has to be s

Re: menu structure

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 01:03:38AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1) The number of items is very big. Do we have any room to grow ? Oowriter > interface is a clone of the old Word interface that was considered a > > 3) There is IMHO useless complexity, like the 7 different preview formats. > I

Re: menu structure

John Levon wrote: > - what the biggest problems are with the current structure Some statistics : first figure is the number of menu items, the second number the total menu + sub-menus + sub-sub-menus items LyX svn blank document with a table File : 17 ; 53 Edit : 17 ; 79 View : 19 ; 55 Insert :

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: I think that either we build something based on likes/dislikes, or something based on HIGs. In the later case, I am happy to be involved, in the earlier case I will not be involved very much (but just as happy). You're right, but: What follow are all very

RE: Re: menu structure

> I think that either we build something based on likes/dislikes, > or something based on HIGs. In the later case, I am happy to be > involved, in the earlier case I will not be involved very much > (but just as happy). You're right, but: - In the thread it was also mentioned that we would like

Re: menu structure

Pavel Sanda wrote: i will try. when i go to the file, i'm usually looking for something which has something a) to do with files generally (ie it does not have anything to do with this in file particular. for example open another file.) b) or has something to do with this file - but it conce

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 17 sept. 08 ? 20:27, Konrad Hofbauer a écrit : >> P.S. On accusing me of fraud / cover up: Have you really worked through >> >> to be able to say so ??? I think it should be enough to support my claims >>

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: >> just to give some feedback the file/document distinction to me as a user >> is >> quite clear > > Can you please (honestly) explain this distinction to me (or define)? > I feel like I am missing something here ... i will try. when i go to the file,

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 17 sept. 08 à 20:27, Konrad Hofbauer a écrit : P.S. On accusing me of fraud / cover up: Have you really worked through to be able to say so ??? I think it should be enough to support my claims once with a

Re: menu structure

Le 17 sept. 08 à 20:27, Konrad Hofbauer a écrit : P.S. On accusing me of fraud / cover up: Have you really worked through to be able to say so ??? I think it should be enough to support my claims once with a proper reference, and not

Re: menu structure

Pavel Sanda wrote: just to give some feedback the file/document distinction to me as a user is quite clear Can you please (honestly) explain this distinction to me (or define)? I feel like I am missing something here ... and adding the items into file menu looks pretty messy. That is anoth

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: >> Can you point to a program where _all_ document-level settings are in >> File menu? We shall not over-interpret the HIG. > > I do not have much to compare to by hand, only OO 2.3 and Word 2003. > > Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properties" in File. > Both o

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: > Somewhere else in the File menu: > [File] New Window > [File] Close Window The HIG do not really specify this (I only took that from Firefox and Safari). One could also argue that these two should be in Window. These could be in Document/Tools: [Edit] Spe

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > For example, LyX users are used to having a Document->Settings... Item. >They will be disturbed if they have to look for one of the most important menu items. IMO - no, no, no. If we start to care about legacy, nothing good will come out. And it is worth remembering

RE: Re: menu structure

> Sorry (really), can you please tell me (again) which items you don't see fit? These could be in Document/Tools: [Edit] Spellcheck [Edit] Thesaurus [Edit] Change tracking [File] Statistics This one Document/Format: [File] Document Settings Somewhere else in the File menu: [File] New Window [Fil

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: I only reasoned that some of the items did not belong to the place they were put according to the HIG. And to propose something else, I found a common factor and I remembered having a menu in LyX where they might fit in. Sure. Please, be welcome to reason

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Forgot (sorry for the noise): And both don't have any more document-level settings, as far as I can see. Not a Format>Page, by chance? A tools>Language? In that sense, yes, you are right. The question is what we learn by

RE: Re: menu structure

> And I disklike a document-menu: > It breaks the cross-platform HIG concept of File - View - > Window menus, and I do not understand what is the difference > between a file and a document. You may dislike it. I never said it has to be a Document menu; never said that it is very common to have a

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: Well, I just wanted to make a distinction between content-related and content-unrelated items. (And I chose Document, because LyX has already a Document menu and I do care about legacy, see below) The name "Document" does not really transport the notion of "

Re: menu structure

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 06:49:05PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > And about the discussion if we should merge View and Window - menu: > > Every application I seen on my desktop, all Apple apps, all Mozilla > > apps, OpenOffice, Word 2003 (on XP), ... have a View AND a WINDOW > > menu, and

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Forgot (sorry for the noise): > And both don't have any more document-level settings, as far as I can see. Not a Format>Page, by chance? A tools>Language? JMarc

Re: menu structure

"Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What if the HIG doesn't have the correct place for these items...? You remove the feature. JMarc

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properties" in File. Both of them don't have a Document menu. Both have (a Windows-HIG) Tools menu. What is the difference between file and document in the first place ??? I

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I only followed the discussion with an eye. Could some nice soul point >> me to the relevant HIG part? > > That is my job ;-) It would be nice to start a wiki page with links to the apple (or vista or...) HIGs for the different parts of the menus. >

Re: menu structure

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: leuven edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: collapsed status is also saved in the document (like it or not), so i have put this in the file menu for now I would not do that. File menu is more for physical state of the document (so I guess Compressed can belong there). If y

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properties" in File. > Both of them don't have a Document menu. Both have (a Windows-HIG) > Tools menu. > What is the difference between file and document in the first place ??? In OO File>Properties is no

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Can you point to a program where _all_ document-level settings are in File menu? We shall not over-interpret the HIG. I do not have much to compare to by hand, only OO 2.3 and Word 2003. Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properti

Re: menu structure

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Can you point to a program where _all_ document-level settings are in File menu? We shall not over-interpret the HIG. I do not have much to compare to by hand, only OO 2.3 and Word 2003. Word 2003 has the Page Setup in File, OO has "Properties" in File. Both of the

RE: menu structure

> - it is very sneaky to remove the View menu again.. Moving all items > from the Window menu into the View menu would ALSO be an option... not sneaky, i just moved the 2 items in the view menu. the window menu was much fuller so i makes sense not to name it view. of course we could s/window/view

RE: Re: menu structure

> > Maybe, it is a HIG interpretation thing, but I'm seriously doubting > > that the HIG says that content-related stuff like the "Document settings..." > > must be in the File menu. > > Correct. (but I still think it is the right place) > > > Things like page setup do not influence the conten

Re: menu structure

leuven edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> collapsed status is also saved in the document (like it or not), so >>> i have put this in the file menu for now >> >> I would not do that. File menu is more for physical state of the >> document (so I guess Compressed can belong there). If you do that,

RE: menu structure

>> collapsed status is also saved in the document (like it or not), so >> i have put this in the file menu for now > > I would not do that. File menu is more for physical state of the > document (so I guess Compressed can belong there). If you do that, why > not put "Insert Table Float" too??? hey

Re: menu structure

leuven edwin wrote: i like this myself (if I can say that..) I don't. Which HIG does it follow? /Konrad

Re: menu structure

leuven edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I did not know that, I see know. It should not be like this >> (i.e. Inset states should be independent in multiple views >> IMO), but this is another topic... > > collapsed status is also saved in the document (like it or not), so > i have put this in th

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> For example, LyX users are used to >> having a Document->Settings... Item. They will be disturbed if they have >> to look for one of the most important menu items. > > IMO - no, no, no. If we start to care about legacy, nothing good will > come out. C

Re: menu structure

"Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe, it is a HIG interpretation thing, but I'm seriously doubting that > the HIG says that content-related stuff like the "Document settings..." > must be in the File menu. Things like page setup do not influence the > content of the do

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: - it is very sneaky to remove the View menu again.. Moving all items from the Window menu into the View menu would ALSO be an option... If you propose something like this, then please propose a LyX-Menu-HIG. - The File->New Window and File->Close Window do

Re: menu structure

Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: Maybe, it is a HIG interpretation thing, but I'm seriously doubting that the HIG says that content-related stuff like the "Document settings..." must be in the File menu. Correct. (but I still think it is the right place) Things like page setup do not influ

RE: menu structure

> as in attached Sort of.. ;-) > i like this myself (if I can say that..) I like it too, but... (just being constructive) - it is very sneaky to remove the View menu again.. Moving all items from the Window menu into the View menu would ALSO be an option... - The File->New Window and File->

Re: menu structure

Edwin, "for the sake of hig-ness" - I guess that means I am higgy? Quite possible. :-) About the open/close windows, tabs, etc., and independent of the menue discussion, I don't quite get what does what (esp. the "Close tab group"). Should that not be a simple "Close tab"-functionality?

RE: menu structure

as in attached menu order: file, edit, format, insert, math, go to, typeset, window, document, application, help toolbars is in application fullscreen in window i like this myself (if I can say that..) hig2.inc Description: hig2.inc hig2.ui Description: hig2.ui

RE: menu structure

> [4] Our document settings are file-specific parameters, saved with the > document, so it is IMO very similar to the Page Setup-item in the HIG: > Page Setup... . Opens a dialog for specifying printing parameters such > as paper size and printing orientation. These parameters are saved with >

RE: menu structure

> > but let's see: attached the reworked menu, following most of your suggestions > But there is a View menu everywhere - in the XP HIG, Vista > HIG, Apple HIG, Wordpad, Office 2003, ... so now possibly also soon in lyx... > Don't refuse just because you don't like it. that's what all religiou

Re: menu structure

Hi Edwin, thanks for your comments. leuven edwin wrote: konrad wrote: just as a side note; i think it is good to have some directions, but i don't think we should treat the apple hig as the holy bible (personally i like apples, but as a fruit). as i see it many of these ui design decisions

RE: menu structure

konrad wrote: > Edwin (and others), > > great thanks for starting to work on this! thanks for having a look as well... > I have a number of suggestions for changes, strictly based on > the HIG [1] (except those sentences starting with IMO). just as a side note; i think it is good to have some di

Re: menu structure

Konrad Hofbauer wrote: ... [lots of typos and other nonsense] ... Just skimmed over what I wrote, again. I hope I make sense nevertheless ... ;-) Cheers, Konrad

Re: menu structure

Edwin (and others), great thanks for starting to work on this! I have a number of suggestions for changes, strictly based on the HIG [1] (except those sentences starting with IMO). If something is left open by the HIG, I refer to what I assume are applications that well consider the HIG, name

Re: menu structure

leuven edwin wrote: pavel wrote: isn't possible somehow to get navigation panel and viewing source items together? its a different logic, but my brain somehow search for the floating dialogs on the same place and maybe i'm not alone. in the attached they are both in the window menu

RE: menu structure

pavel wrote: > isn't possible somehow to get navigation panel and viewing > source items together? its a different logic, but my brain > somehow search for the floating dialogs on the same place and > maybe i'm not alone. in the attached they are both in the window menu i moved the open/close all

RE: menu structure

> leuven edwin wrote: > > updated version attached (and got rid of the tools menu) > > > > did not look at the shortcuts yet... > > isn't possible somehow to get navigation panel and viewing > source items together? its a different logic, but my brain > somehow search for the floating dialogs on

Re: menu structure

leuven edwin wrote: > updated version attached (and got rid of the tools menu) > > did not look at the shortcuts yet... isn't possible somehow to get navigation panel and viewing source items together? its a different logic, but my brain somehow search for the floating dialogs on the same place a