The previous thread died, so I will start a new thread, as the forum advised.
I currently teach design, using the industry standard Adobe InDesign. However, I have no wish to exclusively promote commercial software, and so (re)turned to Scribus to see what changes had occurred in the last while. This is my first forum post, since I am actively concerned at this point. I had thought that after 15 years of development Scribus might be in a better state.
I have many issues with Scribus but will start with workflow, since this is the most important aspect. Yes, the features must be there, but unless the software is efficient to use, it will not be taken up.
I have read and commented on Martin Reininger's
slideshow that proposes some excellent changes to the panels.
The biggest problem currently in the workflow is the character and paragraph formatting. These properties should be assigned through styles. Doing otherwise is the hack "word processor" approach, which Scribus should not be promoting.
However, given that some users may still want to work the
ad hoc way, direct property editing cannot be forbidden. But the current workflow makes it the high priority approach, erecting barriers to the proper workflow.
In particular, there is
no way to edit a style from the Text Properties panel. I must open a separate Style Manager dialogue, which is not a dockable panel. Once a style is defined, I must return to the Text Properties panel to apply it. This is a terrible workflow.
I recommend that the Text Properties panel be redesigned as a style panel. The Style Manager can then be removed as superfluous. In fact, any dialogues one may need to work with regularly should be replaced by panels.
To accommodate those not using styles, there can be one default style for each type (character, paragraph, etc.) that applies anywhere an actual style has not been explicitly defined. The workflow will then be identical in all cases:
First, select an existing style or create a new once. Second, alter its properties, which would be displayed directly underneath the style name. If the "default" style is selected, the current text would be directly updated.
This method would be superior even to InDesign, because the large character/paragraph toolbar in that program encourages users to make modification in the context area, even though this is usually the incorrect approach.
I hope this explanation suffices. I short, I am proposing two things. First, a more fluid and customisable panel system, as Martin suggests. Second, a styles system that is much easier to use.