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

Good evening Ricardo, all!

Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2011, 17:40 +0100 schrieb RGB ES:
2011/3/7 Christoph Noack <>:

Another thing that might be helpful to know. If we have to decide
whether items (e.g. toolbar icons) should be available per default, then
we will (sooner or later) require serious usage data for that. At the
moment, we miss the updates by the " User Feedback
Program" [1]. So, if anybody sees the chance to work on that ... that
would be great.

Sure. In fact, I'd said that there are no simple answers for the
toolbar icons questions ;)

But the autocorrect options I think is a more important issue:
specially "Apply numbering - symbol" and
"Apply border": they generate very irritated reaction from users
(phrases like "I would like to know if there is a way to disable the
irritating auto numbering and auto format functions" or "I want to
completely disable the automatic numbering or bulleting of lists. They
drive me crazy, and I would rather do any such by myself, my own
way"... these and other appears quite often on the Community forums)

You are right - the autocorrect options are something that people who
want to be in full control (thus: no automatic or over-clever changes)
don't like. But, there are also guys who really love this feature.
Setting the default to "off" will just change the people who write such
comments :-)

To be serious again, this topic is - amongst others - one of those that
cannot be sufficiently solved with a changed default. Also in the UX
team at OOo we discussed that from time to time, so is my personal
      * The real problem is that changes are applied every time the
        software tries to identify the intention to insert (e.g.)
      * The very first time, the Help Agent pops up and tries to inform
        the user. Although it's a good idea, it is totally unhelpful
        because it: pops up at a position where it is easily missed, it
        is just a picture without sufficient information, it doesn't say
        "hey, click on me" to get further information", it simply
        disappears after a certain time, people already went crazy
        because of "Clippy" --> bad preconditions :-)
      * User can revert the change by "undo" (which sometimes works,
        sometimes it does not)
      * There is no way to tell the software within the context: don't
        apply it this time, don't apply it in this document, don't apply
        it ever, what is this change about

So we might say the problems are: missing "self-disclosure", missing

This is one of those things, that Microsoft did right (mostly). Some
years ago, I've collected my thoughts on that - and although already a
bit outdated (because I would do some things differently), here is the
page I've started:

Having such a framework would help to resolve a lot of other issues as
well. So this might be something, we might add to our list of
"WhatWeNeed" if we want to improve LibreOffice.


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.