How to switch to "classic" citation mode back

tomasz_gajdek
I find the new citing interface disgusting beyond words, user unfriendly and pushed without consent and obvious rollback option in the UI.

Is there any way to use the classic one (https://www.zotero.org/support/word_processor_plugin_usage_classic) on newest Zotero for Windows 11 and Zotero Connector for Chrome?

connector: 5.0.201
zotero: 9.0.2

What was wrong with intuitive "arrows" interface, known for example from file transfer programs, that UX/UI developers decided to throw this functionality to junk ex cathedra??Do I really have to install an older version of Zotero just to continue a workflow I always had??
  • adamsmith
    edited 3 days ago
    The classic interface wasn't keyboard friendly and required massively more clicks to do the same thing as any of the new ones, and it doesn't allow for any of the features that let you take advantage of items selected/open in Zotero -- it has been supported as legacy for more than a decade, so I'm afraid no, it won't come back (you can technically roll back to old Zotero versions, though obviously stuff will start to break eventually, starting with sync).

    If you have specific things that you feel like you're not able to do with one of the two updated options, let us know and we can try to help, though please do recall that you're talking to real people here, so keeping things friendly or at least professional would be appreciated.
  • dstillman Zotero Team
    1) https://www.zotero.org/support/forum_guidelines#etiquette

    2) Make sure you've read through the announcement for more details on the new dialog.

    3) If there's something you're having trouble with in the new dialog, you should say what it is. The classic dialog hasn't been the default dialog in Zotero for 15 years and has been largely unmaintained during that time. The Library mode of the new dialog is a direct replacement for the classic dialog, and it provides various features (like Selected Item/Open Document selection) that have been available for years to people using the previous default dialog.
  • tomasz_gajdek
    Sorry for the earlier lack of etiquette but such modus operandi is simply forcing a change on users with bogus explanations. This is not up to any standards in the first place.

    So supposedly the new window style is better for keyboard-centric workflow. Great. Still how is it a justified change for mouse-centric workflow?.

    This "unmaintained code" of citation window was vulnerable, memory unsafe, some concrete fault was identified?
    I understand users and developers don't often think alike, but I feel serious about it. I consider placing a fixme bounty, just because this new windows makes me non productive.

    Old window is the prefered version by the community, as you can clearly see from the amount of confusion and requests for rollback on the forums. So people like it, and you will refuse to provide it, just so?
  • dstillman Zotero Team
    Zotero has millions of users. Nearly any change produces a few forum posts. A few posts complaining about the removal of a dialog that hasn't even been the default citation dialog for 15 years does not somehow mean that it was "preferred by the community". (The new dialog has also been in beta for over a year, with no major complaints.)

    Again, Library mode is a direct replacement for the classic dialog. We added many new features to the default citation dialog over the years, and all those features are now available to people who prefer choosing citations via a library browser. Other long-awaited upcoming features could never have been made available in the classic dialog. No one benefits from using an unmaintained dialog that lacks years of efficiency-enhancing features, has unfixed bugs, and includes an editor that both encourages behavior that breaks citation updating and hasn't been necessary for 15 years even if you really want to.

    So again, if there's something you're having trouble with in the new dialog, you should say more. Just calling it "disgusting beyond words" is not going to be helpful.
  • tomasz_gajdek
    Those are excuses. It's obvious that if you tamper with default output citations you do this on your own responsibility. I didn't encoutner any unfixed bugs, at least crucial to basic workflow.

    Like, this is not "emacs space bar heating" situation. Members of academia, the de facto only user of citation software, are very used to legacy software, and UX/UI is a crucial part of it. Nobody would be harmed, if this legacy window style was left as an option.

    My trouble with the new dialog is that it cannot be rolled back to the old one. So if there really isn't any plan to change it, then I guess the topic can be closed.

    Just tell me if it would be possible in theory to write the old UI wrapper as an Zotero extension in this case...
  • dstillman Zotero Team
    edited 3 days ago
    Nobody would be harmed, if this legacy window style was left as an option.
    I mean, that's just not the case. There's a significant development cost to keeping a major interface working as other related parts (the collection/item trees, the citation processor, the word processor integration code, the editor component, the underlying platform) change. There's a support cost for us to supporting a dialog that encourages citation breakage and has bugs, and a support cost for people teaching Zotero to explain an abandoned dialog that works totally differently from the default dialog. And there's an efficiency cost for users who miss out on years of new features that will never come to the old dialog.

    Just in general, the idea that no previous version of any interface should ever be removed, even when there's a direct replacement, is nonsensical.

    Zotero is open source. You can do with it whatever you can figure out how to do. But the old dialog is obviously not coming back, no. And since you can't actually articulate a problem with the new dialog other than that it's not the old one, then yes, I think we're done here.
This discussion has been closed.