Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Björn,

Sorry, just now I saw this email. I'm having many problems with my email client (I think it is looking for revenge because my Forums thread, hahaha), so if there are any email that I didn't replied, please call my attention. :)

My reply:

On 01-02-2011 19:13, Björn Balazs wrote:
I agree. This is the very basic differentiation. I followed that in the
mindmap. But I alos think this is not the most relevant differentiation for
about 99% of the use-cases. Because you can only create References, Bookmarks
(and I guess variables and stuff I do not yet understand). Nearly no users -
except from power users - will use this features. So this functionallity needs
to be there but should step a little to the back.
It's true, I didn't think trough this point of view. Thanks for explaining that way, the whole is clearer now. But just a note: references are very important in my documents and its the only field type I already used in this dialog actually. Maybe this happen for others too.

It is problematic that there are soooo many fields. This makes it hard to find the field you want. This is way I tried to do some categorizastion of the fields.
Yeah, I admit it would take more clicks, but maybe

It it one of the foundations of cognitive psychologiy. If you should have any
information that I do not have, please give it to me! You can of course use
methods of chunking to extend this information, but the number of 7+-2 simply
is the capacity of your short term memory. No discussions I know of :) (Ok,
can be less, e.g. when you drunk a lot of alcohol - but not talking about any
clinical aspects)
Well, I can't present any evidence, it was just my intuition and memory about things I had read. I'm personally a bit worry about these exacty numbers. Stress situations, like a final day to finish a big college work, could not change these values? And also the organization of the options on the screen? But it seems to be no important things to care about now, since they can be solved (or even more affected) by other choices of this wizard.

If you take too few categories, the tree gets very deep. This is not good
I actually agree, but maybe there are some way to avoid go very deep in the tree path.

I suggest to rethink the whole dialogue. And we can only find the best
solution if we understand what users do in here and what they use the fields
for. I think the following is true, but I am not sure that is all.
Yeah, again I agree totally. Now the whole issue is clearer to me. Since I saw your [wiki] fisrt organization, I perceived my solution (Create/Use) can not hold on all the possibilities that good.

We will need this anyway - and Cederic actually initiated working on this
topic. Hopefully he is not scared about the scope the whole discussion takes
:) - Cederic: are you?
It's great! I didn't know Cederic is part of the developing team! Really great! :)

Best regards,
Paulo José O. Amaro
Computer Science Student
Federal University of São João del-Rei
WebDesigner / Linked Empresa Júnior
Blogger /

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.