Hi, Great work, Jesse… Looks exciting :-)
Le 15 avr. 07 à 15:51, Jesse Ross a écrit : >> I kinda like the way projects are shown, although I'm less convainced >> by the whole overlay system. I think it would be better to have no >> project management overlay, > > Where would all the Projects live? They're not tagged, so it doesn't > make sense to have them in a tag list. I'm open to other suggestions > for how to do Project management, though. It makes sense to tag Projects like any other objects. More at thend of this mail… >> and just keep the shelf overlay (possibly >> though you could create more than one shelf). On the projects >> themselves, we could get rid of the document toolbar on the right. > > Where do you want minimized active documents to go? If we have Projects (as Workspaces), Project Shelf, better Expose and window shade I'm not sure minimization is really needed. We reduce the number of windows visible on screen at the same time with each feature. Another solution we would be to put minimized windows in Expose overlay/mode. > Back to the > Project Overlay? (I would actually be fine with that -- we could > remove the distinction between closed and minimized documents). Would work well. The problem is more related to utility windows like inspector windows (in short, non-document windows). >> The right-corner project icon should be a smart folder as well, no ? > > Well, in essence it is, but it's not "smart" in that you're doing no > searching or tagging. Clicking that icon simply shows you all the > Projects on your system. I think it is not unreasonnable to envision 100, 150 or more projects for a single user. > Some other notes not in my last email: > > This is based almost exactly on Brian's write-up here: http:// > brian.muhumuza.googlepages.com/working_with_objects.html > I stole the Project Overlay system from him. I saw that :-) > I am up for something completely different than what I made, > particularly if it's less mentally complex. The dual Tag/Project > overlay system can become very, very messy quickly (consider that you > might be viewing a Project, a Project Overlay, and a Tag Overlay all > at once). > > I had also considered unifying Tags and Projects (so that every > Project was just the result of tag1+tag2+...+tagN), but that doesn't > really work either (as per the email called 'Tags, Projects and > Objects' that I sent earlier). It may be that Tags and Projects are > just not compatible, and we have to have one or the other. I think the current tagging model is really extreme and will be problematic for various tasks. Aside of that, I really like the idea of tag-based browsing/management. For example, it's really hard to visualize mentally a Shelf or a Trash which result from tagging objects. You cannot really map physical objects to virtual ones if you remove key property like 'spatiality'. In the real world, you would tag an object 'Move to trash' but not 'Trash', for the last case you would precisely move it to the trash. A trash based on tagged objects would be too much prone to data loss… To illustrate the point: - the user put an object in the trash - few days later, the user want to empty the trash - first he takes a quick look to its current project, he observes the object he want to be sure to keep is still in the project - so he empties the trash - only then he observes the object has badly vanished from the project That's why I think we should probably mix tagging model and a more stable/spatial model to be used when it really matters. Such stable/spatial model can be implemented by relying on Folders or Hierarchical Projects. It's also important the environment should be able to handle smoothly volumes/devices from foreign environments. In other words, you need to support browsing folders since that's the "way the objects are tagged" on other environments. Hierachical Projects are not a bad choice if we clearly decide running projects are not nested in term of workspaces. I mean: you won't have to exit several running projects (by double-clicking on the desktop several times) to come back to root project/area. They can be hierarchical but run side by side as it is case currently. Using hierachical folders inside and outside projects could prove not to be a bad choice too. With this choice, we wouldn't support hierarchical projects. I also agree with Nicolas on reducing the number of Overlays. Tag overlay are basically just Object Manager windows, so why not display them simply like that. We may opt for the same solution to replace Project Management overlay. Shelf overlay should support multiple selections by dragging, so I would be in favor of exiting only on double-click in an empty area. It should probably offer both copy and pick for objects. Here is a proposal to support this easily: - one click + drag --> pick the object(s) - two clicks + drag (on the mouse down of the second click you drag) --> pick a copy of the object(s) Picking object in a Shelf is probably more common than picking copies of them, so the first case should be the easiest imo. In Brian's proposal, iirc you click on a Project one time to view its Shelf and two times to open it, I would say this behavior seems simpler visually and more flexible rather than having a separate Shelf entry on the "sidebar". The advantage of your solution is the big and clearly visible drop target (better than the hot-corner solution imo). So I'm not sure finally :-) Cheers, Quentin. _______________________________________________ Etoile-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
