Bug 68654 - FILEOPEN: the template manager UI should mimic open/save window
Summary: FILEOPEN: the template manager UI should mimic open/save window
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
unspecified
Hardware: Other All
: medium enhancement
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard: BSA
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-08-28 11:29 UTC by boicottms
Modified: 2014-12-23 05:52 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description boicottms 2013-08-28 11:29:07 UTC
Problem description: 
in my opinion the template manager doesn't work well. I prefer the old one but can't remember when it changed.
What's lost:
1. we had a standard directory navigation system: the new one is confusing, I don't know where I am in the file system
2. we used to have a list of template names and an optional preview (toggable with the description). Now I only have icon previews and names. I would like to be able to change view (list, icons, or sizable preview) and the description. Also properties would be appreciated.
Anyway I think it should mimic the standard open/save window. Please do not reinvent the wheel. thank you

              
Operating System: Windows 7
Version: unspecified
Comment 1 bejectannt 2014-01-16 02:09:52 UTC
yes (confirm with version 4.1.4.2 on archlinux)! It would be more clear  to the user what if there would be a filename field (empty or "enter name here") beneath the "save" button. Similar to the usual (non-template) "save as ..." dialog.
Comment 2 Robinson Tryon (qubit) 2014-12-21 19:02:34 UTC
One for the UX Team
Comment 3 Adolfo Jayme Barrientos 2014-12-23 05:52:43 UTC
This was the design:

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Templates_and_documents_rework#Tentative_Design

and we won’t just scrap it on the whole, sorry.

While I agree that the current implementation is far from ideal, it’d be much more useful if you filed individual, task-focused reports directed towards the improvement of the dialog (and coherent with its design, once you’ve read and understood the wiki page) instead of a negative “REVERT IT”.

This report is just too broad on scope to be adequately managed, thus I’m closing it, but that doesn’t mean we’re rejecting your thoughts. But you should know that we have a design specification and we’re trying to build towards it.