Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] new range name dialog proposal

Hi Christoph, everyone else,

> @ Astron, according to your latest mockup [1], names would still be
> handled one after another. So the time issue for the Modify Name is the
> same like for the "Update Name after Leaving the Edit Field" proposal
> (my mockup). Right?

Changing a single named range would take as long as it takes today,
changing 3 named ranges "at once" (changing things at once was only
possible in the old dialogue – so yes, this observation is absolutely
correct) would take the current time times 3.

So, the stats are:
* your proposal would fare the same for adding named ranges
* your proposal would fare worse (depending on how much is changed)
for modifying ranges, if two or more out of the four fields (name,
range, scope, type of range) are changed
* my prior proposal would fare worse, if, again, two or more of the
four fields are changed.

Performance-wise, the new mock-up's still a mixed bag, and today's
design fares best for more complex cases. That said, it is also
dreadful (as we probably all have noticed).
Usability-wise, the new mock-up is also very much a mixed bag and I am
not extremely happy about that.

However, LibO is supposed to challenge Office and the question is how
much we should prioritise the common case over the less common one
here. The prior mock-ups still solved the problems of 80 percent of
users very well (performance and usability-wise).
(If it was "my" project, I'd try to go after the 80 percent and hope
that advances in hardware and the calculation engine would make up for
the lost performance.)


> By the way, I like the progress bar idea (2b), if things take time. But
> shouldn't it be shown in the Calc status bar (as usual for
> re-calculations)?

I know, but I liked the fact that the feedback could be immediately
within the dialogue.

Regards,
Astron.