On Monday 15 August 2011 10:59:56 Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > On Friday 12 August 2011 Aug, C. Boemann wrote: > > On Friday 12 August 2011 15:02:46 Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > > On Friday 12 August 2011 Aug, C. Boemann wrote: > > > > On Friday 12 August 2011 10:52:56 Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > > > > On Thursday 11 August 2011 Aug, Cyrille Berger Skott wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > We have been offered the possibility of a season of usability > > > > > > project (season.openusability.org), which would be mentored by > > > > > > Celeste. > > > > > > > > > > > > We are not lacking of interesting usability problems. So the > > > > > > question would be what do you think should be our priority for > > > > > > this ? > > > > > > > > > > Well... While we still have a lot of work to actually fix the > > > > > usability issues that the previous seasons identified, I think > > > > > that we could reap benefits if we move away from the usual "let's > > > > > identify 3 big issues in Words when compared to Microsoft Word" > > > > > > > > > > My suggestion would be, based on Inge's mail: > > > > > > > > > > * devise a complete interaction design for setting default values > > > > > for shapes. > > > > > > > > If we add to that moving the accompaning dockers to a tool (default > > > > tool?) then I think we have a good project. But we need a dev that > > > > can assist > > > > > > I'd say that that would best be a separate project, since it's pretty > > > huge to figure out that correctly. > > > > Hmm, in that case we better do the moving project first as i see default > > values highly depending on where and how the values are editied. > > Actually i'd say these topics are inter dependent, so if you think it's > > too huge then maybe we should look for another project > > I'm kind of lost right now :-). Do we actually already have a wiki page or > something where the next steps for the dockers gui are listed? I didn't > realize that the plan was to tie all shape property dockers to tools as > tool option widgets -- or am I wrong and isn't that what you suggested? well you yourself suggested such a possibility and i think it ould make sense but in this case all i'm saying is that we should see things as a whole
> > For the default values, I was thinking of just the add shapes docker, where > it should be possible to add/remove default shapes and to edit the > properties of the shapes that are in that docker. ok if this is the limit then i don't see any problem with such a project description _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
