From: Christiaan H. <cmh...@gm...> - 2007-10-25 13:07:37
|
On 25 Oct 2007, at 2:55 PM, Xavier Cambar wrote: > > Le 25 oct. 07 =E0 13:25, Christiaan Hofman a =E9crit : > >> >> On 25 Oct 2007, at 12:16 PM, Alex Hamann wrote: >> >>> >>> Am 25.10.2007 um 11:59 schrieb Xavier Cambar: >>> >>>>> Which menu are you talking about? You mean the entire menu bar? >>>> Absolutely. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I wonder, was there something you wanted to do, but couldn't >>>>> find it >>>>> in the menus? >>>> No, I found it, after having my heart beat slow down a little. ;) >>>> What scared me the most is the Display menu, and an example of >>>> obvious (well... obvious to me, in fact) change would be to set the >>>> sizing and zooming options in their own submenu. There will be a >>>> gain >>>> of 5 lines, which is not a few to one's reading eyes. >>>> >>>> The notes options being dispatched in 2 places (the Notes menu, >>>> and a >>>> submenu in Tools) is also a mess. >>>> >>> not necessarily: I a way, I think here we se a setting like the one >>> you are requesting for the "view" menu: while the notes are of =20 >>> course >>> tools and thus you need to have the notes tool in that menu =20 >>> (allowing >>> you to create a certain note just by clicking on the pdf) the >>> lengthier "notes" menu allows to add a specific note of your choice >>> but without setting a permanent preference. >> >> The fact that they are in different places is important in this case, >> because the context should make it clear what their function is (as >> this would not be clear enough from the titles). > > As far as I get it, Skim allows two workflows for note-taking: > instant note taking and mass note taking. > Instant note taking allows the user to add any type of note in a mode- > independant manner. This is not exactly true in the current version, > as mode-independancy is not what we have. > The workflow for instant note taking should be the following: > > [mode1 (=3D any mode)] -> [*Note type selection] -> [Note mode] -> > [*Note drawing/editing] -> [return to mode1] > > The steps with a star are the one in which the user interacts, the > other are implicit and/or automated. > > > Mass note taking entirely relies on the use of the Tool Mode > (available via the Tools menu). Once this mode active, the note > should be still selected with the corresponding item in the Notes > menu. The workflow would be like: > > [mode1 (=3D any mode)] -> [*Note mode] -> || [*Note type selection] -> > [*Note drawing/editing] || -> [*any mode] > > The steps betweens || are repeated an undefined number of times. > > > Hey! It's almost what we have already, isn't it? Quite cool, but > Two things are still to be worked on: > * mode independancy of instant note taking > * removing the "note type" submenu of the Tools menu, becoming =20 > useless. > > Everything concerning should (IMHO) rely on the Notes menu, except > the choice of the mode, which of course is about the Tools menu. > Oh, and the keystrokes cmd-ctrl-number are much easier to remember > that those in the Notes menu... > > What do you think? Did I make myself clear (I'm asking because I'm > not sure :-p )? > You misunderstand the design. Your way would make the note tool modes =20= completely useless (as you say yourself). Your proposal forces one to =20= change the tool mode every time you want to add a note. It is than =20 much more convenient to add the note directly using the Notes menu =20 items. The idea of a tool mode is that your are in a certain state =20 *and stay there*. This way you can easily add several notes (of the =20 same type) without having to do much else than moving the mouse. So =20 it is important to understand that the note tool modes are designed =20 to quickly mass-add a single type of note. Also adding notes is not really mode independent, as it works only in =20= text and note tool mode. This is also by design, as the purpose of =20 those modes are not compatible with note editing (and being able to =20 add a note without the ability to edit them is wrong). Christiaan > >>> This is the reason why I would not want the "view" menu to be split >>> into parts: the next new user might find it unintuitive that display >>> settings are in two different places. Obviously, logical =20 >>> structure is >>> also a matter of personal taste. >>> >> >> Though splitting PDF view settings and window layout settings makes >> sense. And I agree that the View menu is far too long. It makes also >> that you need to move the mouse more to select an item. >> >> Christiaan >> >>> >>>> I thought that maybe a floating window could help for faster note >>>> taking and editing, somewhat like the oh-so-cool-and-unobstrusive >>>> iPhoto bezel panels "Adjust" and "Effects" shown when editing a >>>> photo. >>>> >>>> >>>> Xavier Cambar >>>> >>>> Note: as a french user, I translated quite litteraly the names of >>>> the >>>> iPhoto menus. Maybe they don't fit with the english version. >>>> >> |