On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 07:27:25PM +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Obviously this is just another reason why distinguishing between "page" and "paper" is important. With enough generality and flexibility, I could specify my pages are 7.5"x10" (printable), while using 8.5"x11" paper. My canvas would then be composed of several 7.5"x10" rectangles side by side. It would be left to me to trim paper edges to compensate.
Maybe part of my difficulty with this is the existing page concept in inskape on on hand has a sort of infinite canvas and then only part of that is intended as a printable page. There is was a trick/habit in Macromedia flash to use the off page areas as kind of a scap area (and it is a habit I think inkscape users might be taking advantage of) but when you go and put individual pages right beside each other that work habit is not an option.
Sure it is. Your scrap area is just that area not currently defined by any page boundaries.
Users however (as can be seen from bug reports) are certainly expecting the different kinds of layouts you speak of, some of which could be handled simply by better print control fitting the drawing to the desired pages, not necessarily needing to setup all that information in program in advance.
Right. Also, notice the number of requests for printing at Kinko's or other such print shops. A very poor way to solve the inkjet/laserjet
My point was not try to do too much in inkscape, the alternative being to push for GtkPrint.
So best I think we can do is make things as generic and flexible as possible, and enable as many different workflows as possible.
... which without enough restraint gives us an airplane cockpit user interface with a baffling number of choices. Realistically though I'd guess Inkscape to err more on the side of providing the option (like KDE) than leaving it out so users dont get confused or shoot themselves in the foot (the Gnome approach, which I think anyone doing tech support will thank you for, not yet a huge contstrain of inkscape but we have a fair few Frequently Asked Questions).
My girlfriend is a 5th grade teacher and several of her students have picked up Inkscape. I once talked to her about a simplified Inkscape that would be more accessible for children. But she was emphatic that 5th graders are quite capable of learning adult tools, they just need time to learn and experiment.
They're not cowards and they won't be scared by a powerful UI.
The word "coward" is terribly prejudicial (and I know you dont mean much by it but that doesn't make the words any less loaded or the attitude any less common). Forgive the user.
the Windows Icons Menu Pointer (WIMP) system was designed "for children" and intended to be easier than the command line. turns out that although most people are capable of using the command line the easier solution is rather more popular.
(Would mentioning how the easier more "user friendly" Xemacs displaced emacs be a more relatable example for some.)
The things that are important for neophyte users are the same things that are important to any user: That the program is rock solid stable, well documented, has a well-thought-out UI that doesn't get in your way, and can be used for a large variety of tasks.
Further, as I've pointed out before, our principle userbase is not neophytes or the occasional user, but rather the heavy/power users who are likely to become contributors. Where neophytes and occasional users are important is that every heavy/power Inkscape user starts off as one of those.
The beginner and the infrequent user suffer the same learning problem and they suffer it over and over again. To appeal beyond those who use computers heavily (even if they are the primary target) the shallower the learning curve the better and as I mentioned before the superficial ease of use can often trap users in (and conversely user often balk at the likes of Blender and GIMP).
We don't need to dumb down the interface or disable a lot of flexibility for neophytes; we just need to avoid scaring them off right away, give them a good experience, and pack enough generality and power that they can grow with the program. We're going after the Visio/Illustrator crowd, not the MS Paint crowd.
There is no clear line here, the balance is hard to get right. Having good defaults always helps, less complexity without sacrificing flexibility. Offering many small options is much like microptimising, sure it works but the problems can be solved at a bigger level.
A comment from just a few minutes ago on IRC:
What happens is, the inside of the line is filled. What I am drawing freehand, say, is a circle. So, I end up with wha looks like a donut oh, crap. I am wrong. Stupid me; ignore me. I was forgetting to join the endnodes
users tend to blame themselves for not understanding ... this might be another opportunity to improve the affordance and somehow hint to user that the two ends of the line can be connected.
A little confusion at first, but a lot of love moments later. ;-)
... and I'll probably keep suggesting they could have more love and less confusion.
However all of this is just one speculation, until someone codes. Point