On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:41:38AM -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> We still do require a Contribution Agreement, for good and valid reasons I've
> explained many times - most notably that it allows us to improve our license
> in
> the future. Had we not required the CA in the past, we
Marine Kelley :
> That would be awesome. I know there are reasons behind the removal of
the pie menu and its replacement by a well known list menu, but PLEASE I
am so
> much more productive and less frustrated with the old pie menu ! Muscle
memory and size of the clickable areas and all that.
On 20/08/2010 3:16 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:04:21 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
>
>>On 2010-08-18 14:14, Aidan Thornton wrote:
>>> On 8/18/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
While there were some good things about the v1 implementation of pie
>>
That would be awesome. I know there are reasons behind the removal of the
pie menu and its replacement by a well known list menu, but PLEASE I am so
much more productive and less frustrated with the old pie menu ! Muscle
memory and size of the clickable areas and all that. Simply put with the
list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/19/2010 10:16 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> A smarter approach would be to automatically move the cursor itself to
> the center of the pie menu (without moving the latter to avoid an
> annoying "drifting" effect) when you click on a sub-menu.
>
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:04:21 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> On 2010-08-18 14:14, Aidan Thornton wrote:
> > On 8/18/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> >> While there were some good things about the v1 implementation of pie
> >> menus, they also had some flaws - such as not openi
One thing I liked about the pie menu is the area where the mouse click needs
to take place increases in width as you move away from the center, making it
easy to make the desired pick. I often find when navigating nested
rectangular menus that it's difficult to keep the mouse hovered in the
desired
On 2010-08-18 22:42, Tateru Nino wrote:
>You can also revoke the copyright assignment at (almost) any time.
No, you can not. There is no such provision in the Contribution Agreement.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http:
econdlife.com] On Behalf Of Mike
> Monkowski
> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 4:52 PM
> To: Henri Beauchamp
> Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewer Development Announcement
>
> Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>> SL is the ONLY so-called (but a
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>
> SL is the ONLY so-called (but actually still not, obviously: a Canada-Dry
> LGPL, perhaps ?) LGPL Open Source project requiring a License agreement
> from its contributors !!! This makes strictly no sense and is a clear
> impairement.
2010-08-18 15:11, Timothy Horrigan skrev:
Scripters have already had to deal with the case where an avi's name
changes. The Lindens have always had the option to rename avis (e.g.,
if an offensive name falls through the filters during registration, if
an innoucuous name becomes offensive due t
-
From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com
[mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Mike Monkowski
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 4:52 PM
To: Henri Beauchamp
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewer Development Announcem
Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> SL is the ONLY so-called (but actually still not, obviously: a Canada-Dry
> LGPL, perhaps ?) LGPL Open Source project requiring a License agreement
> from its contributors !!! This makes strictly no sense and is a clear
> impairement.
>
> I'd also be curious to know any o
I am not sure if that's what you meant as "not opening a submenu centered
on the mouse click". or whether my suggestion would resolves it but I think
the pie menu repetition on sub level is prone to confusion indeed.
I would envision a pie menu on the first root level. And more normal
submenus on
On 18 August 2010 09:53, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
>
> I think that if someone were to step up and do the work to create a
> better pie menu implementation that we could do good comparisons with
> (and especially if it allowed menu style to be a preference setting),
> then it would be a mu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/18/2010 12:04 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> If I understood him correctly, what Q seemed to think was the right
> behavior is:
>
> * The first mouse-down opens the pie centered on the mouse location,
> so no choice is under
Am Mittwoch 18 August 2010 21:04:21 schrieb Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence):
> If I understood him correctly, what Q seemed to think was the right
> behavior is:
>
> * The first mouse-down opens the pie centered on the mouse location,
> so no choice is under the mouse
> * If the choice i
On 2010-08-18 14:14, Aidan Thornton wrote:
On 8/18/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
While there were some good things about the v1 implementation of pie
menus, they also had some flaws - such as not opening a submenu centered
on the mouse click.
I actually puzzled over this a bit when I
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:41:38 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> On 2010-08-18 6:38, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> > - DO NOT SEGREGATE SUBMISSIONS: since you made Snowstorm LGPL, there
> >is now*no more need* for the FLOSS exception and for contribution
> >agreements (since you can t
On 8/18/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> While there were some good things about the v1 implementation of pie
> menus, they also had some flaws - such as not opening a submenu centered
> on the mouse click.
I actually puzzled over this a bit when I first realised that Second
Life's pie men
On 2010-08-18 11:54, Arrehn Oberlander wrote:
> I looked at the XUI API docs to see what would be involved in bringing
> them back. I was concerned to see that the pie menu status lists as
> "deprecated". I believe this should be re-examined and hopefully be in
> the backlog for debate.
I'm goin
I realize that there's pros and cons to this UI selection vs box
popups. However I don't believe the choice is at all cut and dry. When
I stopped using the pie menu (because it doesn't exist in viewer 2.x)
I discovered all sorts of navigation difficulties that where
previously unknown.
- The box
On 2010-08-18 8:58, Argent wrote:
> Well, look there, the ability to type in chat while interacting with
> objects in the world isn't on the spreadsheet anywhere.
>
> This is a complete show-stopper for viewer 2 for me, and for many of
> my friends who interact primarily in text and do not use
On 2010-08-18 6:38, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
- DO NOT SEGREGATE SUBMISSIONS: since you made Snowstorm LGPL, there
is now*no more need* for the FLOSS exception and for contribution
agreements (since you can take a snapshot of the Open Source viewer
at anytime and incorporate them to your
On 2010-08-17 0:16, Joel Foner wrote:
> Providing text transcription of voice speakers for the disabled, as
> well as those who for various reasons cannot enable voice at the time,
> and for capture of a text searchable archive of the whole event, is a
> solved problem. Totally solved. It need
On Wednesday 18 August 2010 14:58:07 Argent wrote:
> Well, look there, the ability to type in chat while interacting with
> objects in the world isn't on the spreadsheet anywhere.
why would you need to type anyways when you can use voice... and if you don't
want others to hear your voice you can
Scripters have already had to deal with the case where an avi's name
changes. The Lindens have always had the option to rename avis (e.g.,
if an offensive name falls through the filters during registration, if
an innoucuous name becomes offensive due to news events, if a Linden
loses his or he
Well, look there, the ability to type in chat while interacting with objects
in the world isn't on the spreadsheet anywhere.
This is a complete show-stopper for viewer 2 for me, and for many of my
friends who interact primarily in text and do not use voice chat.
___
Jesse wrote:
> I am so relieved that Linden Lab does actually listen to feedback from
the residents that have supported it for so long. This should guarantee
that the proposed user name/display name never goes into affect then.
I don't think that what you're implying there is true at all. I kn
(Illustrative example)
I am so relieved that Linden Lab does actually listen to feedback from the
residents that have supported it for so long. This should guarantee that the
proposed user name/display name never goes into affect then.
Back to OP subject thou; the spreadsheet does look pretty good
On 2010-08-16, at 13:23, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> Well, the first improvement to do is to actually revert 80% of the UI
> to the way v1.23's one was working, especially getting rid of that
> moronic side bar is its modal tools which impair productivity and
> user-friendliness... The question is: wi
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:24:48 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote:
> On 17 August 2010 02:44, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:27:34 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote:
> >
> > > Linden Lab has the final say in what goes into the Linden Lab viewer. A
> > > third-party viewer team has the final say
On 17 August 2010 02:44, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:27:34 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote:
>
> > Linden Lab has the final say in what goes into the Linden Lab viewer. A
> > third-party viewer team has the final say in what goes into their viewer.
>
> Indeed, but if LL is so close-mi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/17/2010 5:14 AM, Aidan Thornton wrote:
> For example, this shows up in the replacement of pie menus with
> standard right-click menus. The big advantage of pie menus is that
> they're fast to use - all the entries are large and easy to hit with
>
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 07:19:15 +0200, Laurent Bechir
wrote:
> Bryon Ruxton a écrit :
>> Mike,
>>
>> First of all, I said "us" in the context of those, like Henri, who
>> hate the sidebar. As for "we" in general,
"us" and "we" still don't work.
"hating a sidebar" is not a serious approach to UI.
al Message-
From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com
[mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Henri
Beauchamp
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:45 AM
To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewer Development Announcement
On Mon,
rmly planted in "It's our world our imagination" enjoy the decline, blame
it on metrics, the economy your next door neighbor and his little dog too.
--
From: "Latif Khalifa"
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 6:01 AM
To: &quo
On 8/16/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> Think about it for a minute - there are an infinite number of possible
> solutions for how to build a UI for a virtual world viewer - what are
> the odds that the first or second attempt produced the best possible
> UI? We need new and creative idea
ontent faster, cheaper, better.
-Original Message-
From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com
[mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Lance
Corrimal
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:25 AM
To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewe
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Yoz Grahame wrote:
>
> The Snowstorm project is aimed at dramatically increasing community
> involvement in Viewer development and improving communications around it.
Very nice words indeed. But not new. Shall we look into what happens
when user experience clashes
be
for
the other aspects of LL's service delivery.
Thank you for the opportunity of having a dialog.
-
From: Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
To: Henri Beauchamp
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Sent: Mon, August 16, 2010 2:56:25 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewer
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:27:34 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote:
> Linden Lab has the final say in what goes into the Linden Lab viewer. A
> third-party viewer team has the final say in what goes into their viewer.
Indeed, but if LL is so close-minded as to reject any change to the UI
that would allow v1 l
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 14:56:25 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> On 2010-08-16 14:23, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> > Well, the first improvement to do is to actually revert 80% of the UI
> > to the way v1.23's one was working, especially getting rid of that
> > moronic side bar and its modal
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 10:10:01 Marine Kelley wrote:
> > Suggestions:
> > - make notifications (inventory offers, group notices) stay on screen
> > like they used to be
>
> I'm sure there is a debug setting or an XML option to do that, I'll look
> when I have time. But they would pile up pretty
> Suggestions:
> - make notifications (inventory offers, group notices) stay on screen like
> they used to be
>
I'm sure there is a debug setting or an XML option to do that, I'll look
when I have time. But they would pile up pretty quickly, unlike 1.x the
notification do not hide each other (whic
Totally forgot to mention:
HATE: the new IM / notification / local chat interface. I have yet to see a
communications interface that is THAT cumbersome and badly designed.
Suggestions:
- make notifications (inventory offers, group notices) stay on screen like
they used to be
- put chat and IM
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 00:39:53 Mike Monkowski wrote:
> Bryon Ruxton wrote:
> > I think addressing the hurdles that prevent people still on 1.23 to
> > move to 2.0 before you get into
> >
> > “Rapid, effective deployment of new features and functionality.” is the
> >
> > most urgent priority
Bryon Ruxton a écrit :
Mike,
First of all, I said "us" in the context of those, like Henri, who
hate the sidebar. As for "we" in general,
it is the majority who says they hate or dislike viewer 2.0 as
indicated by multiple polls
or articles like the following, justifying the word "we" (i.e.
In a previous email I said: "The ability to do so is not new technology"
To clarify, I am *not* suggesting that some software program be run to
provide text transcription, as that is not totally solved in a speaker
independent way. Using actual people, however, to provide real-time and
after the f
Providing text transcription of voice speakers for the disabled, as well as
those who for various reasons cannot enable voice at the time, and for
capture of a text searchable archive of the whole event, is a solved
problem. Totally solved. It needs no figuring out or experimentation.
Real-time vo
If you conduct the meetings in voice, you also limit the ability of non-english
speakers. If it's done in chat, machine translation is a viable option. Chat
may take more time, but isn't it worth the time and effort to do things right?
On Aug 16, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Tateru Nino wrote:
>
>
> O
On 17/08/2010 4:56 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
Will try to come, hoping it's not going to be one of those voice meetings
where non-English people like me can't speak well enough neither understand
what is being said...
This meeting will include voice because it's so time consumin
On 16 August 2010 17:58, Andromeda Quonset wrote:
>
> At the risk of upsetting the decorum here, I just can't let this go by.
> Mr. Oz Linden, perhaps YOU should depart from ALL viewer development.
> Statements of "It is absolutely not going to happen, and any suggestion to
> that effect will be
Mike,
First of all, I said ³us² in the context of those, like Henri, who hate the
sidebar. As for ³we² in general,
it is the majority who says they hate or dislike viewer 2.0 as indicated by
multiple polls
or articles like the following, justifying the word ³we² (i.e. the overall
majority of Resi
At 12:56 PM 8/16/2010, you wrote:
On 2010-08-16 14:23, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
Well, the first improvement to do is to actually revert 80% of the UI
to the way v1.23's one was working, especially getting rid of that
moronic side bar is its modal tools which impair productivity and
user-friendli
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:50:49 +
"Dickson, Mike (ISS Software)" wrote:
> As another poster has already pointed out, there is no *us* in a
> argument like this. Stop trying to attribute your personal feelings
> as the will of everyone else. I'm sure there are people that don't
> like the curren
opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Open Viewer Development Announcement
Oz,
Henri does not seem to suggest going back to 1.23 code as much as the UI
behavior ought to go back to the way 1.23 functioned. And rightfully so when it
comes to "That moronic
Bryon Ruxton wrote:
> I think addressing the hurdles that prevent people still on 1.23 to
> move to 2.0 before you get into
> “Rapid, effective deployment of new features and functionality.” is the
> most urgent priority in my opinion.
Seconded.
___
Oz,
Henri does not seem to suggest going back to 1.23 code as much as the UI
behavior ought to go back to the way 1.23 functioned. And rightfully so when
it comes to ³That moronic side bar is its modal tools which impair
productivity and user-friendliness...² As bluntly put as it is. This is a
pro
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
o...@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> I've said this before, and I'll repeat it again here:
>
> Don't waste everyones time suggesting that we throw away Viewer 2, or
> that
> we revert the UI to Viewer 1. It is absolutely not going to happen, an
Excepting the minorest detail: There is no "community" to collectively
throw anything anywhere. There is only a collection of independent
developers, each of which makes up their own mind, and may or may not
agree with the vocal minority.
Personally, I have a few problems with viewer 2, but most
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) <
o...@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> On 2010-08-16 14:23, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>
> Well, the first improvement to do is to actually revert 80% of the UI
> to the way v1.23's one was working, especially getting rid of that
> moronic side bar
On 2010-08-16 14:23, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
Well, the first improvement to do is to actually revert 80% of the UI
to the way v1.23's one was working, especially getting rid of that
moronic side bar is its modal tools which impair productivity and
user-friendliness... The question is: will LL fin
my thoughts are
1 the 2.* BACKEND is great (but needs to have some sort of SDK)
2 meetings should have Voice turned off just for performance reasons
(plus the problem of getting a good record of what was actually said
using voice)
3 SnowStorm is findable in the wiki but that link is a bit "off"
4
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 12:25:21 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> What’s Next For The Second Life Viewer?
>
> Linden Lab spent the better part of the last two years revamping the
> Second Life Viewer to create Viewer 2. Some of the changes were
> important new features, and some were contro
Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> * Improve the user experience
> o Make continuous improvements to the design and
> implementation of the Viewer’s user interface.
Will the User Experience office hours be resurrected? Will anyone go
back and look at the archives of pa
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
wrote:
..
> This change in how we do viewer development is a result of taking a good
> hard self-critical look at what was working and what wasn't, and trying to
> find a better way. It was clear that:
>
> Viewer 2 would have benefited
On 2010-08-15 14:01, Glen Canaday wrote:
This does sound much better than the previous way of doing things - more
open and closer to the Bazaar, etc., but I want to ask how it came
about. What was the impetus? Is this a direct result of Phil's return to
more active involvement with LL in general
This does sound much better than the previous way of doing things - more
open and closer to the Bazaar, etc., but I want to ask how it came
about. What was the impetus? Is this a direct result of Phil's return to
more active involvement with LL in general? Is it simply the desire of
the devs added
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Snowstorm_Team
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Snowstorm_Project
It was just malformed formed, the document is easily enough to find.
On 8/15/2010 10:29 AM, Maximilian March wrote:
/*"Snowstorm operates in the open; the home page of the Snowstorm team
is on the
*"Snowstorm operates in the open; the home page of the Snowstorm team is on
the public wiki at" A BROKEN LINK!**
*
NOT a very reassuring feeling that the very first call-to-action link in
such an important communication leads us to... a broken link.
Thank you, LL QA people, for being asleep at the
Gang,
ok, sorry, cool, but I still feel uncomfortable. Viewer 2 was for
users, less so for creators. Creating got harder. I might be cursing
in church but 'd like to see a Viewer, for Joe Random Sixpack crossing
the street, and a Creator. You don't create web pages in a browser.
You don't create v
What’s Next For The Second Life Viewer?
Linden Lab spent the better part of the last two years revamping the Second
Life Viewer to create Viewer 2. Some of the changes were important new
features, and some were controversial - some were both. The bulk of the design
and engineering work was
73 matches
Mail list logo
