Le 2014-01-22 16:16, Mirek M. a écrit :
I knew this was going to be brought up -- the word "complement" was chosen
deliberately.
Again, this is a question of focus.
I'd really prefer to focus on creating the best speech complements rather
than speech replacements, as, when given in conjunction with a speech, the
latter tends to take focus away from the speech. If the slides are a
full-on replacement, why is the presenter even there? Why not just autoplay
the slides?
That's not to say putting up only slides is worthless -- they often provide
a good overview of the speech.
That said, it's always better to provide the slides along with the talk
(video or audio, or even transcript), and that tends to be the norm
nowadays.
I believe what you are describing is an outcome ideal and not a
functional use of Impress. IMO, we have to be careful to not purpose
Impress to a narrow definition as it may lead to a tool that is rendered
of less use for those who use it for what it essentially does best, and,
that of slideshow presentations.
In education, we start school children experimenting with presentation
software and later following with teaching them to complement their
slideshows with speeches. It is only at the very end of their academic
highschool years where we try to hone students skill sets at creating
speeches that are in fact complemented by their slideshows.
What you are basing your present ideal of the tool is the outcome of all
of this training. Till now, Impress fits in well with this type of
training and it would be sad to see Impress being given a design purpose
that sits only well with an end outcome goal.
IMO, giving Impress too narrow of a design purpose may result in having
the very people who use it now to train early years students to look at
using a different tool in primary/secondary school systems. It is pretty
obvious to classroom teachers that tools used to teach young students
are often times the tools they will use later on in life.
I see no purpose in moving the design of Impress away from what most
people see it as being a good standalone slideshow tool. However, I see
every reason to see Impress given an added design emphasis of not only
being a good quality slideshow tool, but also one that helps in ways to
complement speeches, for example, add some way to store "presentation
notes" that may be read off a second screen, while the first screen runs
the slideshow; or a way to store notes that accompany a slideshow, and
where these notes may be pulled later to read along with the slideshow etc.)
We should be careful in giving any of our software too narrow a purpose
definition, as we risk designing it for too narrow a slice of
users/niche. Therein is where I would worry.
Cheers,
Marc
--
Marc Paré
Marc@MarcPare.com
http://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: design+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Context
- Re: [libreoffice-design] The purpose of Impress (continued)
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.