12 April 2014: The OpenOffice Wiki is not, and never was, affected by the heartbleed bug. Users' passwords are safe and wiki users do not need take any actions.
Proposal by Miroslav Mazel
|Please do not edit this page unless you are the original author. Your feedback and comments are welcome in the Comments section below or on the firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list.|
Design Proposal "Iced Coffee"
- 1 Design Proposal "Iced Coffee"
- 1.1 Summary and Status
- 1.2 Quark interface
- 1.3 Suggested Interfaces
- 1.4 Other aspects of the interface
- 1.5 On Vertical UIs
- 1.6 Thoughts
- 1.7 Command categorization
- 1.8 Author or Team Working on This Proposal
- 1.9 Comments
Summary and Status
This proposal is unique in that it's not really a suggestion at all. It's a thing moldable and shapeable into UIs very similar, if not the same as, existing ones as well as those suggested here.
Overall, though, it aims at flexibility, logic, and efficiency all together. It tries to rethink every aspect of the interface without seeming too alien to old users. It features a flexible central "Quark," which can assume various shapes, forms. It tries to avoid dialog windows and categorical oddities. As for the name, it's random, based on a personal favorite :).
Status: Well, I've restructured a lot on July 19, 2009, but now it seems to be done. Comments are always good, though.
Iced Coffee has one central UI element -- let's call it the Quark for now.
- It is very flexible. It connects menus, toolbars, panels, etc., allowing the user to change any one of these elements into any other one. At the base, there are commands. These commands are put into groups -- those are the contents of the menus, the panels, the toolbars. And these can either be spread across the interface, or put under tabs.
- Like MS Office 2007, it uses several icon "modes", holding labels and using different icon sizes as appropriate. Tab/menu labels collapse into icons (which are otherwise only shown at mouse-over), differentiated visually from buttons. Vertical interfaces, including menus, feature small icons with labels, each one with its own row. Horizontal interfaces tend to use large icons with labels. Large icons with labels collapse into small icons without labels; if even then space is not sufficient, ellipses are used to indicate more commands, which the toolbar shows on hover (or click, when using a tablet).
- Contextual categories are differentiated by color from static categories. Just like static categories, contextual categories can be created (the user can choose the selected element) and edited. Contextual categories are automatically gone to as they appear.
- To speed things up, when the user hovers over a category label, the category's contents are temporarily shown to allow quick access to commands.
- The Quark can hold special UI elements, such as galleries, color pickers, sliders, and rotation wheels. These are not presented in menus in line with other commands, but rather as subcategories.
- Galleries resemble Microsoft's style pickers. The features that use galleries include style pickers and Navigator. They preview the action they carry out (see mockup). When there are too many styles to fit in the window, scroll bars are shown. When there are many, many more styles than shown, an arrow that reveals all of them (in a much bigger window) is presented instead. Optionally, galleries can include zoom sliders and categories (like Navigator, which puts different views in categories). Styles are now emphasized and connected with the tools that edit them.
- Commands in groups can also further be grouped in subgroups that are resized together. Subgroups, the contents of which have a uniform size, appear in "style editors" (bold, italics, highlight, underline, font, etc. for text), for example, where differing sizes would look awkward.
I think the mockup above portrays it better than I can in words.
The Sidebar consists of three things (shown incorrectly in the mockup) -- Navigator, Stockpile, and Styles.
- The Navigator here is pretty different from its current implementation in OpenOffice.org. It provides a way to easily navigate, search, and browse through various document elements (slides, images, tables, outline [yes, this is where the outline mode went], etc.) as well as add slides, labels, and manage timing. (Also notice, in the mockup, how there is a "glass" bar over the top portion of the thumbnail of the second page -- that represents a timed animation within the frame.)
- "Stockpile" is a feature based on the current Gallery and a suggestion by Leonard Mada. It is a place to drag files one might use in a document (think the "Clips Pane" in iMovie '06). The user can then save these "stockpiles," creating somewhat like what the old gallery used to be. Also, there is a temporary Clipboard stockpile with files placed in the clipboard (i.e. copied or cut, not just from OOo).
- Styles now actually previews styles and doesn't just show the label (the same goes for the new font picker). If the font of the style is too big or too small, the font size is shown in a small rectangle over the label.
I think vertical interfaces are great. My suggested vertical interface would consist of the Fluid Bar from the horizontal interface being transferred to the side and the sidebar categories being pushed down to the bottom of the same bar.
Other aspects of the interface
- Rulers are hidden by default, but shown on hover and when moving objects.
- When moving objects or adding tabs, columns, or rows, the ruler markers disappear to simply show the distances between marked objects.
- The tab mode indicator has been replaced with a plus button. This should make its function obvious to the user (the tab icon, on the other hand, could be clear only to those familiar with tabs). The plus button triggers a drop-down menu offering the different kinds of tabs as well as columns and rows (which are what "Sections" are now called, to minimize confusion, as the same label is used for a different feature in other suites, and "Rows" makes more sense as a counterpart to "Columns").
- Rulers now surround the page/slide, since that's what they logically should do (as page groups, called sections elsewhere, although not yet implemented in OOo, allow different page dimensions and orientations in the same document). This also draws attention to the rulers from users not comfortable with the previous rulers and makes them stand out as something new, therefore encouraging more to try it.
- The unit drop-down menu appears next to the ruler on hover.
- The "Hide Rulers" button is under "View," where you expect it to be. Let's not clutter up the scroll bar with buttons like "Hide Rulers" which don't belong there, having nothing to do with navigation...
Although I guess there is a general consensus that OO.o should hide the status bar, I still want it there for a few simple features.
- Being bilingual, I use the status bar all the time to switch between languages. In fact, all the multilingual people I know use this.
- The zoom slider has been a much-wanted, revolutionary update, and it would be a great impediment if it was hidden by default.
- While we're on the topic, the zoom slider has been updated with quick-zoom buttons, for common zooms like the full width or height of the page, two pages, 100% view, and slide sorter (yes, that's where that feature went, although it can also be duplicated by a maximized sidebar), shown at hover above the slider.
- With the birth of the sidebar, the status bar picks up sidebar buttons, which both raise awareness of the sidebar and provide very quick access to its features.
- Quick statistics (Word count, page count, etc.), here a tooltip triggered by a mouse-over on the page indicator (next to the language indicator), tend to come in handy, at least for me.
- The bar can, of course, be hidden under "View," for those who really don't like it, or, for the advanced users, customized with the features it used to hold.
- Slides can now be browsed through using the scrollbar like pages under Writer. I'm not sure why this wasn't the original behavior, or why the other suites stubbornly hold on to it.
- Slide numbers are now shown over the scrollbar to significantly improve click navigation.
- To streamline, the navigation arrows get rid of the "dot," but keep the double arrows, showing the navigate-by buttons on hover over the double arrows.
Pockets and Info bars
The main article: User_Experience/DirectManipulationSnippets. I especially like the way JaronBaron suggested Pockets should work, with access at the bottom, and tabs at the side.
Help should be completely revamped to be and feel friendlier and lose its reputation of being intimidating/frustrating.
- Images, videos, tutorials, and common-language descriptions should all be added, sometimes in place of unclear directions.
- Help feels like a part of the suite
- Search needs to be vastly improved, along the lines proposed in the [User Experience/Command search command search proposal]. "What's this?" should work for EVERY command in the interface, and there should be an infobar with a nice big button to end this mode.
- The Help home screen should be simple: A search box, a few large categorical links (similarly to System Preferences/Control Panel in Mac OS and Windows, although fewer and larger), and a link to online resources. It should feel very much like the new Options tab.
- Tutorials especially should utilize videos, simple, step-by-step directions, loads of screenshots, and/or even a "Do this for me" button, which would walk the user through the task.
- Let's tout the Help improvements (once we're sure it's really good) with the release of the Renaissance OO.o (or even earlier; this could be implemented independently), since it seems a lot of people now simply disregard Help.
While we're on the subject of categorization, let me talk about modes. Modes are, by (my) definition different ways of viewing the same information (/document). So...
- The handout mode doesn't make sense. What is it anyway? It's pretty unusable, and it should actually be a wizard, available under "File" or "Print."
- [Presenter] notes (another naming conflict) shouldn't be viewable under a certain mode. They should be accessible ALWAYS.
- When the cursor is brought to the bottom of the window, a button bar, similar to that in full-screen media players, containing options such as "Back," "Forward," "Slides," "Beginning," "Exit," should be shown.
- There should also be a big "Change timing to move to the next slide now" (this name should be shortened later) button when rehearsing.
- Distracting animations (especially those with sounds) and other annoying habits are deemphasized (or removed, if everyone agrees).
Resizing and Rotation
- The diagonal resizing of pictures is now "locked" (width-to-height ratios are maintained) by default. The horizontal resizing still stretches the picture, but now an infobar is shown informing the user of this and providing an undo option (which doesn't affect any of the changes made after the pic was resized).
- "Locked" and "unlocked" resizing is now denoted by the "resize squares," which are colored when resizing is locked, and white when it is not. A lock icon, open or closed, shown on hover next to the diagonal resize squares, is used to easily switch (for the average user) between locked and unlocked mode.
- 3D shapes can now be resized in all three dimensions using the horizontal and vertical "resize squares" by dragging in the perpendicular direction (which currently does nothing). In this way, 2D shapes could be quickly and easily made 3D. Also, with prisms, resize squares are shown in the middle of the edges (not corners or the current awkward square). With other 3D shapes, the resize squares should be placed where they make sense (a sphere, for example, would have them where it would touch a hypothetical cube around it).
- Just like 3D shapes, 2D shapes should change from resize mode to rotate mode when clicked twice.
- Colors are no longer managed through "Options..." Instead, the new color picker, now more OS-specific (or we could just include something along the lines of the Apple color picker, which is easy to use, yet extensive, under all operating systems), provides access to all colors and lets the user add his own color choices to the swatches. The color picker includes an eye dropper.
- Gradient stops are now managed through a simpler, more intuitive box interface like in Macromedia Flash and Fireworks.
- To avoid dialog windows, Iced Coffee utilizes drop-down menus, pockets, and infobars. "Find and Replace," "Chart Data Table," and "Check Spelling and Grammar," for example, are now inline.
- Comments on changes in the document now utilize notes (why have two different tools for accomplishing the same thing?), and so "Accept" and "Reject" buttons appear along with these notes.
- Tables now act like shapes. They can now be easily moved, resized, selected, and deleted.
- Guides are shown by default.
- When clicked off of, dialog windows (now used almost exclusively to browse) duck under the Quark (showing only the title bar), allowing the user to make changes before returning to the dialog.
- Live preview is used where possible.
- The lightbulb should get a face lift and utilize non-distracting icons to present its message.
- Wherever units are used, there is a drop-down menu giving the user a choice of the unit.
- Shape choices should be simplified (Inkscape manages to use only a few buttons using which the user can draw a variety of shapes -- rounded rectangle, rectangle, and square are, for example, bundled together).
- Writing in an empty space creates a text frame.
- The zoom slider gives 100%, page width, page length, two pages, and page organizer buttons on hover above the slider, inspired by Clément Pillias's gear stick metaphor. The zoom indicator is now a text box into which the value can be typed.
- Pages/slides are now selectable and moveable (this accomodates for the slide sorter).
- For placing windows, OOo uses something like AeroSnap in Windows 7, except now one can drag the window onto buttons labeled 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 at both sides. The target is smaller vertically, but that shouldn't matter too much, as it still complies with Fitts Law. (This should be a feature of the operating system, but as only one is guaranteed to have it so far, perhaps OOo could have its own implementation until the OSs feature it.)
- The text size and spacing drop-down menus feature common values at the left and a slider (similar to the zoom slider) at the right. The menus no longer exhibit the typical drop-down behavior, but rather function on hover (shown incorrectly in the mockup).
- When a bullet from a list is hovered over, arrows appear around it in a circle (up, down, left, and right), and they (along with the bullet) act as buttons. Clicking on the bullet gives a choice of possible bullets (as well as numbering options). Clicking on an up or down arrow moves the bulleted item (or items, if several are highlighted) up/down, the left and right buttons promote/demote the item(s).
- There is an "Add notes" button under every slide.
- The language picker provides quick links to downloads of language packs.
- Consistency is increased. For example, Draw now has a gray background and all OOo apps now have text styles (except Math and maybe except Base -- I don't use it, so I don't know if it makes sense there).
- We should have page groups, at least to be compatible with other suites.
- In Calc, sheets should be shown at the top, perhaps right under a Quark, like tabs are shown in Firefox, because they are too important to be tucked in next to the scroll bar.
- A link to add a footnote, footer, and header appears with hover over the margin in Writer.
- Layers under Draw are shown in Navigator, not as tabs.
On Vertical UIs
Hm. I've been called on to make the central UI element in OOo vertical by default. Here's how a vertical UI would work:
- After the OO.o install, the user would be met with a choice of common UI options (as well as a link to the options dialog). I'm thinking these could be "Horizontal UI," "Vertical UI," and "Classic UI" (menus and toolbars). These would always be available from the Options dialog.
- The sidebar, which, like the Quark, provides quick access to styles, ways to edit them, and other proper tools, is almost as powerful as the Quark, so it could be used instead of a vertical interface and keep a horizontal one.
This is a collection of random thoughts about both the UI and OpenOffice.org in general. It doesn't necessarily relate to the proposal, but I want to get these thoughts out to the community and see what everyone thinks.
This is a very rough illustration of how we could add logic to our categorization, by adding clear, definite definitions to categories with no overlaps. However, don't mistake it for what should be in the final version -- I expect it to be a lot different, but still with solid categorical definitions.
//: a special UI element, usually a gallery
>: a pop-up menu
(>): a split menu (a button and a pop-up menu combined).
<>: not yet present in OOo, suggested as a feature
(): old name for the function
...: the button triggers a UI element, not necessarily a dialog
|Commands which affect the whole suite, but not any document in particular. This menu stays uniform across all OOo applications.||The commands that don't edit the document, but apply specifically to it. These are typically used when editing is done.||The commands that show or hide certain things. These also don't edit the document.||The commands that do edit the document, any part of it, not a particular one. It can be said that these are editing commands that don't fit under any of the other editing categories.|
/Command search box/
Slide show (>)
Preview in browser
Outline / Full
~ Media player
Find and Replace...
Rehearse and Edit Timing
|The commands that create objects.||The commands for inserting already existing objects (so no editing after the command is required).||The commands that apply specifically to the slide.||This is not a category. I'm just putting stuff here that used to belong in a static category that is now being moved to (a) contextual one(s).|
<Diagram > >
/Stockpile/ Special text > (Fields...)
Symbol > (Special Character)
Formatting Mark >
/Slide properties/ (Page...)
Edit style... (View > Notes Master)
Hyperlink... (which now includes "Interaction...")
Date and Time...
Bullets and Numbering...
Position and Size
Crop... (Crop Picture)
<Align > >
Replace colors... (Eyedropper)
A few comments on categorization:
- If we have a "Help" menu, command search should go under that, because that's where it makes sense. That's where the user SHOULD go if he's looking for a command, and that's where it is put under in ALL Mac OS X Leopard apps (yes, even third party ones). But I put it under the application menu in this proposal, as I don't think a button deserves a separate menu and as "Help" applies to the whole application.
- When creating a new document, the user is always met with a template/wizard picker. Templates and wizards are therefore no longer directly in the "File" menu.
- Options are, like Help, a separate tab. Navigation is done through a grid of icons linking to different option categories (like "System Preferences" in Mac OS X, or the home screen on the iPhone). It has two basic sections: "Basic Options" and "Bells and Whistles."
- Some features are renamed. "OLE objects," "AutoText," and others should be renamed to better match its function. "Sections" should be renamed to "Rows," as "Sections" is a name for a different feature in other suites, and "Rows" makes more sense as a counterpart to "Columns". Also, please try to avoid using the words "Auto" and "Smart," because those just confuse the user.
- I think "File," "Edit," "View," "Create," "Insert," "Slide," "Animation," and "Help" are logical static categories that everything could fit under (okay, "File" and "Edit" aren't really logical, but they are used by almost every other existing application, so the user should know them well). However, I propose that more options are bundled with OOo, such as a mimic of the Office 2007 categorization and all (or most of) the other categorizations (there shouldn't be too many), and that Quark customizations, along with all other Options, are saveable.
- Some stuff, like blinking text and movie player, should be removed or made into extensions. Some things should be merged, like New, Templates, and some Wizards (those that create a new document). FontWork should be made into text properties as much as possible and then removed.
Author or Team Working on This Proposal
|Author / Team Member||Contact (OpenOffice.org login name, used for email)|
|Community members, this is where your comments and questions concerning completeness and clarity should be written. Please add your OpenOffice.org login name to let us contact you via email.|
There are a lot of interesting ideas, but this really breaks from the look and feel of the rest of the operating system. I get the impression that this isn't a really big deal on Windows, since a lot of applications theme themselves, but with Linux (and I think Mac os) there is more of a trend to have a standard look and feel for applications. With the Linux style of keeping the window manager/decorator separate from the applications, is there a way for this theme to retain that integration? --Jhc 21:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
|Actually, the look and feel in the mockup isn't part of the proposal. As for the final look and feel, I'd really like it to fit the operating system, like Firefox tried to do with version 3. (Actually, I'm a Mac OS X, and sometimes Xubuntu, user myself, but I chose to do a Windows mockup, since that allows the most diversity). Thanks for the comment.|
Hi Miroslav. I like many of your design concepts and based on this I think we agree on the direction the new interface should take.
-My first question to you is how will presentation viewing be integrated into your design? I don't see any way for the users to quickly start the presentation. My recommendation (which is of course not something you have to follow) would be to add a start presentation button at the top of your navigator pane.
-My second concern is the stress placed on styles which, unfortunately in Impress, can not be applied as in Writer. Since they currently serve little functional purpose, you may consider using that space for other commands.
-For completeness, you may want to add a "Line and Area" and a "Position and Size" tab to your list of formatting tabs.
-I like your visualization of the slide transitions. I definitely think we should adopt something like that.
-Another question; where in your proposal do users access the modify commands (like group, align, arrange, etc...)?
I am trying to be concise so I apologize if it sounds crass. Looks great! Cheers, Jaron --JaronBaron 23:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
| Thanks for the comment. I appreciate it (if you have more, please post it -- don't worry about crassness or insulting me -- even harsh, nitpicky comments are great). To answer:
--Mirek2 01:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Very much like the look. I would suggest menu bar and toolbar tabs as separate lines. Main reason is design scaling to writer excel and database. Items like fontwork toolbar are not in that design either Also allowing room for user custom toolbars. Really minor error in the means for the design to scale up.
Don't be upset with File Edit and so on standard style categories removal of them made users life a lot harder to migrate to MS Office 2007 and up. These old style standards have a place because users know them well. Its baby with bath water dumping them. MS Office 2007 don't copy yet because most business run 2003 or OpenOffice and a lot are changing to OpenOffice and others due to the migration pain that renaming in MS Office 2007 caused. Provide a 2007 mode maybe don't replace old cats they has to remain for user friendlyness. Thinking the Old style is basically common for most Open Source applications out there. Learn once use everywhere --Oiaohm 23:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. The menu bar and toolbar are in a single row because they serve the same purpose and belong in the same category (this won't change, by the way). Scaling works this way: when the window is too small, icons are used instead of text (there's a new mockup) and UI elements are hidden until left with only the Quark and the scroll bar. As for FontWork, I hate it, and want it to be removed (although some of its functionality could be moved to text tools). There is no FontWork toolbar in Iced Coffee (but, as it has to be in the proposal, it is included under "Create"). Maybe you're confusing this with styles?
On user categories, I think that there doesn't NEED to be much more room for them (although there always will be, as the UI is very scalable), since the default Quark already includes all the features. The "customizer" wouldn't probably ADD to the default set (that would get him duplicates), but rather change it (ending up with about the same number of categories). There are also preset customized toolbars, such as those resembling the command organization of competitors and those from this community. The design should scale in all directions (even up, if I understand correctly) -- the icons change to a smaller size, then the text disappears. You can even get the current toolbars (by resizing the toolbar vertically) with the UI, although they are not there by default.
I never wanted to copy Office 2007. Tabs are just a good way to sort out a lot of features (they're like menus, but can generally afford to show more). I think that's the general concensus in all the proposals. File and Edit bother me because they don't have a specific meaning, and this proposal bases on logical sorting, and there absolutely NEEDS to be a change. I feel sorting of commands is current OpenOffice's biggest UI flaw. And if the sorting is logical enough (and it wasn't for Office 2007 -- "Home" is just a collection of unrelated, but commonly used commands, and Undo and Redo are just randomly thrown off the ribbon and onto a Quick Access bar), it will be user-friendly. But the old sorting, along with the Office 2007 sorting, should be available through the aforementioned preset Quark "modes."
Anyway, thanks again for the comments. --Mirek2 04:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
reading your proposal was a real pleasure. Here, it really pays off that you are working for so long on these ideas. Therefore it is quite understandable, that your ideas go far beyond than “accessing functionality”. I noticed many cute ideas... However, I don't want comment the pros/cons, my intention is to ask questions concerning the understandability although it's very well written (sometimes I just don't get it...):
- Question 1, Rulers, surround page/slide: As far as I understand the rulers will directly be attached to the document. If visible, what about objects which cross the page border?
- Status bar:
- Question 2: Why is it general consensus to hide the status bar?
- Question 3, language selection: Could you please describe the reason for putting the language in the status bar? Currently, you refer to bilingual people you know “who use this”.
- Question 4, zoom slider: As far as I understand, the zoom slider zooms out until a number of slides can be seen (slide sorter). As far as I know the behavior of the slides change, there not editable, but draggable. How to communicate that to the user?
- Question 5, scrollbar, get rid of the “dot”: If the navigate-by buttons are shown on hover, does that cover some parts of the document? Will the functional link to the navigator be kept?
- Comment, tabs, tabs for sheets: In Calc, each (“imbecile”) tab is a sheet which belongs to the same document. In Draw, each small tab refers to a layer in the current page. Therefore there is another “meaning”, so they may look different.
- Question 6, categorization, wizards: So if a new document is created, a wizard is shown. Does this also refer to “empty” documents?
- Comment, modes, handout mode: The handout mode may be beneficial to some people. It makes it possible to personalize the content of the page. Companies for example are able to provide a common look and feel”.
- Question 7, slide show, button bar: Is there a reason to put it at the bottom? Can people find it easily (I have some ideas, but... *g*)?
- Question 8, the frame, dragging empty space: Sorry, I'm lost here. What do you mean with dragging empty space? Do you mean to create a “positioning” frame for each element which is added? Thus, separate positioning/sizing and content?
- Question 9, resizing and rotation, undo option: Is this an addition to the “original size” functionality, which also provides functionality which is quite similar? Where to place the info box?
- Question 10, color picker: The “new” color picker is not yet available, so it has to be developed?
- Question 11, gradient stops: Could you please provide a plain link to a picture which shows how this interface looks like (if you find some picture in the WWW)?
- Question 12, guides: What guides do you mean? Guides are shown, if there are in the document. Is your proposal to add guides automatically?
- Question 13, writing in empty space creates frame: How does this work? How to know where this “empty” space is? You mean something like clicking on an empty space and then start typing? Maybe I'm wrong...
- Question 14, zoom slider: Could you please add a link to the proposal by Clement, do you mean this one?
- Question 15, placing windows: I don't know aero snap, so could you please provide a link for us?
- Question 16, stockpile: You say that the gray background serves as a stockpile. Currently, I'm able to put some elements on the background – these elements are not shown in presentations since the objects are outside the page borders? It seems that I don't get the difference. What is the magic stuff?
- Question 17, edit the them: It seems I'm blind, sorry. Can you give me a hint where to find the theme picker?
- Question 17, Other apps: Could you please name the software which provides page groups?
Miroslav, thank you so much for the huge effort you put into this proposal – and the really cool ideas. One last plea, could you please provide as much as information in the description itself instead of answering them separated from your nice text? Thanks in advance! --ChristophNoack 12:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Miroslav. Just a clarification of a point from before in C2: Take a look at styles in Impress. There are not any text styles, there are only Presentation and Graphics styles. I fully agree OOo should stress styles, in fact all my previous design proposals have put a lot of stress on styles, I just wanted it to be clear that the styles tool you currently have doesn't represent the current functionality of impress. Sadly, styles cannot really be applied in Impress, only modified, so users may be confused if the tool remains where it currently is. I recommend you play around with styles in Impress a little; hopefully you will see why they not only need overhauling, but need to be handled carefully in design proposals. Cheers, Jaron --JaronBaron 15:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Sigh. You're right, but I don't think it makes sense. I really think we should be consistent, and I see no uselessness or added hardship in text styles in Impress. Perhaps I'm breaking too many rules here, but I'm keeping this in the proposal nevertheless. --Mirek2 04:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
@Miroslav: Thanks for your feedback! --ChristophNoack 22:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)