Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gcaiod-ooo-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: Armin Le Grand <Armin.Le.Grand@me.com>
Subject: Re: [AOOo 4.0] dev wishlist (Re: Starting a conversation on AOOo
 4.0)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 10:34:55 +0200
Lines: 89
Message-ID: <j5erve$9f2$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <1316640347.57118.YahooMailClassic@web113518.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
 <4E7A5C13.9080505@gmail.com> <003901cc78aa$ec537e50$c4fa7af0$@acm.org>
 <CAEtvNKeWaFGwinWOqO71-c8_VW4PHF1xoroVkAWjnmx0XyNTVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007d01cc78be$c0bd90f0$4238b2d0$@acm.org>
 <6FB51F6A-9742-45CF-B210-5C8C21218B58@comcast.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
In-Reply-To: <6FB51F6A-9742-45CF-B210-5C8C21218B58@comcast.net>

	Hi all,

in the whole discussion some nice ideas came up already. Please could 
someone open a Wiki and collect them there (as Rob suggested, maybe he 
can do that)? I would love to have a collection somewhere to look at 
when the initial changes and a 3.4 are done.

On 22.09.2011 03:11, Dave Fisher wrote:
> I am intrigued by both Ricardo and Dennis's ideas.
>
> Ricardo makes me think of a combination of Word Perfect and other 80s word processors non wysiwyg view with markup.
>
> What if the tree view is of the ODF structure?
>
> A thought now back to vacation!
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 21, 2011, at 2:29 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"<dennis.hamilton@acm.org>  wrote:
>
>> It appears that brainstorming has ended and judgment/evaluation begins?
>>
>> Ah well ... I guess it is time to wait and see how Rob intends to avoid this.
>>
>> - Dennis
>> [PS: Regina - thanks for the tip.  I never knew that was there.]
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: RGB ES [mailto:rgb.mldc@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 15:52
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
>> Subject: Re: [AOOo 4.0] dev wishlist (Re: Starting a conversation on AOOo 4.0)
>>
>> 2011/9/22 Dennis E. Hamilton<dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
>>
>>> If I have to navigate around documents, such as the ODF specifications
>>> themselves, I save as PDF so I can use the forward and back browser-style
>>> navigation.  It would be terrific if that worked in OO.o directly, so that
>>> one could go somewhere, then come back with a click of a button.
>>>
>>> That might help some of the copy and paste rearranging too, although it
>>> might be desirable to have a one-button remember-this-place in some go-to
>>> list pull-down too, having nothing to do with planting a bookmark in the
>>> document.
>>>
>>> There are a large number of navigational accelerators that would be useful
>>> in a Writer document, and having some sort of expandable tree-map sidebar
>>> for quick navigation wouldn't be bad either.
>>>
>>
>> Please, do not do it like LibO: their tree view is a nuisance, almost a
>> show-stopper when you work on long and complex documents. See this issue:
>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36308
>>
>>
>>> OK, and it would also be nice, for power-users at any rate, if it is
>>> possible to collapse and expand the text structures.  That's a major UI hit
>>> though?
>>>
>>
>> It seems, in fact. The main problem I can see with "collapsing headings" is
>> that displaying a "page" on such conditions is completely wrong, so this
>> would need a different approach of how info is presented during edition. If
>> we let our fantasy run wild, we can think of a WYSIWYM (not WYSIWYG) mode on
>> which page constrains are not considered and images, objects and footnotes
>> shows were they are dropped, not were they should be once the document is
>> "compiled". The best example of such behaviour is LyX, a really good
>> front-end for LaTeX:
>> http://www.lyx.org/
>> But a good question to answer here is: Is this feature so important that AOO
>> needs to face such huge changes in the near (or even not-so-near) future? I
>> don't think so: for me, the Navigator is good enough (even if it is possible
>> to make it even better...)
>>
>> BTW, if asked about nice to have features, why not full support for opentype
>> tables?
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=16032
>> There are also long standing issues related with TOC, like this one:
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=27377
>> and many others...
>>
>> Cheers
>> Ricardo
>>
>