layer dialog question
Should the layer dialog show only the "normal" layers, or show also groups which have been temporarily promoted into layers as the quick layer selector does?
-mental
On 3/7/06, MenTaLguY <mental@...3...> wrote:
Should the layer dialog show only the "normal" layers, or show also groups which have been temporarily promoted into layers as the quick layer selector does?
I remember you were talking about it showing even down to individual objects if you expand the tree. In any case, ideally its behavior should be consistent with the statusbar widget; the dialog may be a superset of that widget but not a subset.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org
Quoting bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...>:
I remember you were talking about it showing even down to individual objects if you expand the tree.
I'm leaning away from that now after our last conversation on the topic (some time ago). Among other things, selection of layers (sets the current layer) is very different to selection of objects (selects objects).
I think what I want to do at this point is to do a traditional layers dialog that just does layer-ish stuff, and then rework the XML dialog to provide both "XML" and "SVG Object" views.
The widgets in the reworked XML dialog would be organized something like:
+- HBox +- Notebook | +- XML Tree ("XML") | +- SVG Tree ("SVG" or maybe "Objects") +- Notebook +- XML Attributes ("Attributes") +- (other tabs, depending on currently selected object) :
-mental
mental@...3... wrote:
Quoting bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...>:
I remember you were talking about it showing even down to individual objects if you expand the tree.
I'm leaning away from that now after our last conversation on the topic (some time ago). Among other things, selection of layers (sets the current layer) is very different to selection of objects (selects objects).
I'll start off with, I don't have a particularly strong preference as to which way it works, but the way Bulia mentioned seems more appealing to me.
My question is, how does what you describe above conflict? Is it because technically one is setting and the other is selecting? I think that the dialog would basically be context sensitive. If you're selecting (setting) a layer it behaves as you'd expect. If you need to select (really select) all objects on a layer that's already handled by the Select All function (since it does by current layer). And if you are selecting a child object of that layer, it works as you'd expect there... selecting it. I think that handling down to individual objects in the layer dialog then gives the benefit of easily hiding/unhiding and locking/unlocking objects (which those are not easy for new users to figure out how to achieve... specifically getting objects unhidden or unlocked).
I will say though that what you propose in terms of "classic" layer dialog and enhanced xml editor is quite appealing as well. I'll just be happy to have an easier way to work with layers (specifically the hiding & locking functions). Should I get excited, or is it too soon? :)
-Josh
Quoting "Joshua A. Andler" <joshua@...533...>:
I think that handling down to individual objects in the layer dialog then gives the benefit of easily hiding/unhiding and locking/unlocking objects (which those are not easy for new users to figure out how to achieve... specifically getting objects unhidden or unlocked).
Would doing locking/unlocking/hiding/unhiding in the SVG object tree widget make sense? I was thinking of doing it there as well as in the layer dialog.
-mental
mental@...3... wrote:
Quoting "Joshua A. Andler" <joshua@...533...>:
I think that handling down to individual objects in the layer dialog then gives the benefit of easily hiding/unhiding and locking/unlocking objects (which those are not easy for new users to figure out how to achieve... specifically getting objects unhidden or unlocked).
Would doing locking/unlocking/hiding/unhiding in the SVG object tree widget make sense? I was thinking of doing it there as well as in the layer dialog.
I think it makes a lot of sense.
-Josh
mental@...3... wrote:
Quoting bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...>:
I remember you were talking about it showing even down to individual objects if you expand the tree.
I'm leaning away from that now after our last conversation on the topic (some time ago). Among other things, selection of layers (sets the current layer) is very different to selection of objects (selects objects).
I think what I want to do at this point is to do a traditional layers dialog that just does layer-ish stuff, and then rework the XML dialog to provide both "XML" and "SVG Object" views.
I just wanted to follow-up on this as I had been doing some print work in Illustrator this morning and checked their layers dialog. As of at least AI 10 you can expand the layers down to groups and groups down to objects, etc (and of course continue expanding groups if there are more nested in there). I know we don't follow Illustrator by any means, but the more I think about it, it does make sense to expand down that far in the layers dialog. I think it makes more sense since we are now going to have to work with sub-layers in that dialog anyway (which will already require a tree view since there is now UI to create sub-layers). Just an updated .02 ;)
-Josh
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:03:48 -0700, "Joshua A. Andler" <joshua@...533...> wrote:
I know we don't follow Illustrator by any means, but the more I think about it, it does make sense to expand down that far in the layers dialog. I think it makes more sense since we are now going to have to work with sub-layers in that dialog anyway (which will already require a tree view since there is now UI to create sub-layers). Just an updated .02 ;)
I'm still of the opinion that that's really what you want the Object tree for (layers are objects too, after all, and show up there). The layer dialog should only have layers.
-mental
MenTaLguY wrote:
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:03:48 -0700, "Joshua A. Andler" <joshua@...533...> wrote:
I know we don't follow Illustrator by any means, but the more I think about it, it does make sense to expand down that far in the layers dialog. I think it makes more sense since we are now going to have to work with sub-layers in that dialog anyway (which will already require a tree view since there is now UI to create sub-layers). Just an updated .02 ;)
I'm still of the opinion that that's really what you want the Object tree for (layers are objects too, after all, and show up there). The layer dialog should only have layers.
I'll be honest... if I've used Illustrator for over 10 years and today was the first time I even looked to see if the layers could be expanded (because I never used the layer dialog other than for, well, layers), it makes no never-mind to me. ;-)
It was mostly just an observation... and with the reassurance that the object tree will even show the layers (as it does make sense), my .02 is once again updated. :-) I trust ya mental.
-Josh
participants (4)
-
unknown＠example.com -
bulia byak -
Joshua A. Andler -
MenTaLguY