Development > User Interface

deficiencies of Scribus text edit routine

<< < (2/2)

You make it clear that you have a low opinion of the Story Editor.
I understand that from one point of view one should be able to do everything
in a text frame in the main window, using the properties window on the side.
I am doing considerably more of that as I become more familiar with the
Properties Window, which I found difficult to work with at first. 

All the same I use the Story Editor quite a bit. It is mis-named, for a start: it is not convenient for editing large files, and much easier to use with short texts. The word "Story" is misleading. "Editor" would be fine.

I am pleased with the improvement to the SE found in Scribus 1.5.2 over 1.4.6. The display font can be set, and this improves the look and feel a whole lot. So, somebody has worked on it.
I would merely like to express my hope that there will be further work on it.

yes, i hate the way the story editor currently works.
it has been created at a time when editing in the frame did not work well enough and now is a mixed tool , one that is not really good for any use.

but i love the idea of a *-editor.
in my eyes it should have a way to show the formatting as markup. for most or the whole formatting. no wysiwyg at all.

sadly, we cannot get there by improving the current editor: a new editor with a clear -- modern -- concept should imo be built from the ground up.

nowadays, i gave up trying to get people to specify and build a new *-editor and just ignore it (and use it in the very few cases when editing in the frame is not practical).


p.s.:  it's called story editor because it lets you edit the content of a story and not the content of a frame. i guess that it's a concept that comes from quark express times.
i don't like the name but i don't think that Editor is better (it's not the default way to edit the content).


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version