staniek added a comment. In https://phabricator.kde.org/T665#15282, @kossebau wrote:
> Would it be a good idea to have UI/UX experts look at this as well? Yes, though it would be unfortunate to repeat this -- "they" apparently did: for StarOffice, OO.org, LO , and MS Office at least :) > Because I personally prefer the current UI if I just start the application > binary itself, without any parameters. So if we agree on changing the default > start UI, I would like to keep the current one as option at least, so I can > stay happy. Sure, as always I am OK with options that change the "worldwide" default. > Now, the "frequent" in "frequent scenario" is measured how? :) > > Please rethink the 1 step in the scenario you gave, "Run a word processor, > without delay": How do users start the word processor? By selecting some item > in the UI of their workspace? If so, what do they actually mean and expect > when the chose that item? What about having that item having a more specific > meaning than "start app into whatever state"? > > Looking at myself, Look, without a persona it's to easy to express just own preferences. What I explained is a "Jane User" persona who start typing on a plain white paper. No templates, no customization. This concept is 30+ years old. if we want to break into the mainstream... > I found I have certain set of different subtypes of richtext documents I > create (when talking about page-centric text documents), and most are not > started from just plain empty sheets, but have a dedicated predefined > structure and predefined content: generic formal letters, reports of several > kinds, documentations. > So most of the time I use a richtextdocument editor for a new document it > seems I do not need a blank sheet or another single type of template to start > from. But instead first need to decide on the subtype of richtext document I > am creating. > So the proposed new UX here would be a regression for me and people who also > work like me (e.g. in most offices, the real world work places I mean here, > template-based document creation surely is widespread for improved > processes). Thus the proposal should be an optional start variant IMHO, at > most. > > While talking about it, I personally dream of a workspace which is not just > an app starter, but integrated in my workflows. So for Plasma I have some > draft plasmoid and runner which allows me to start creating & editing new > documents by typing "new letter" or "new $other-doc-template" in krunner or > selecting a template from a plasmoid drop-down, which then results in the > matching app being shown with a new document created from the selected > template, so I can type away. Hello document-centric UI :) I am afraid this drags Calligra again to the Plasma universe, too closely. I believe integration into workflows shall be a separate code installed optionally (maybe by default for Plasma users). This alone makes the integration not worth developing - it's just hell to maintain and do well. > It is currently stuck in making this a general-purpose thing, so it can be > used to create all kind of new documents with all kind of apps. Making things > generic is not easy, especially in a wild world :) > It also needs a patch to Calligra, I should brush that over and hand it in > for review finally in any case, so expect a review request soon. As a secondary feature I believe this is not worth the effort but your opinion can be different. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/T665 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.kde.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: staniek Cc: kossebau, boemann, Calligra-Devel-list, staniek _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
