Hi Ramon,
On 24.09.2014 13:23, Ramon Andiñach wrote:
On 24/09/2014, at 16:56 , Denis Rouzaud wrote:
Hi all,
There is somehow an inconsistency in the behaviour of the current editing map
tools.
Some, like add features, uses the left click to trigger the action.
Others, like the node tool or move feature use press-pan-release mouse events:
* mouse press to select the node/feature
* mouse mouse to move it
* mouse release sets the position.
I would propose to standardise this and for the latter tools propose the
following work flow:
* left click enables the move
* left click again to validate at position
* or right click to cancel
Why changing this?
If you look at CAD software, they also use the proposed approach. And there's a
reason for doing so, which is valid for QGIS too.
With all due respect I've never understood why click-click is better than
click-drag for moving.
I've always found select and drag far more intuitive and echoes equivalent
actions in most of the other similar tools I use.
There is no overhead: still the same number of actions with the finder
two presses instead of a press + a release. And you gain the freedom of
your finger to do something else while moving.
I suspect, in such cases, we speak more from experience rather than true
intuition. People with long CAD experience find the click-click much
more intuitive than people used to dragging-and-dropping pictures into
word the other way around.
As for the apparent inconsistency, in my head they're different sorts of things.
If I'm adding a feature, I put it (click) here.
If I'm moving a feature, I pick it up (click-drag) move it to there and put it
down (release).
I further suspect that since the node tool does more than just move nodes, this
is probably asking for a separation into node-move and a node-insert and a
segment-move and a... tools.
I really like having all of these in one tool, instead of perpetually going off
to some menu to pick a different tool.
[snip]
This is why, changing the map tools behaviour is requested if we want to go
further with CAD tools in QGIS.
Please say this isn't a case of; we need to change the established behaviour of
the main program to make a plugin work better - because it's pretty easy to
read that way.
That's a way of reading it. The other way is we need this if we want to
go further with CAD tools in QGIS.
I could propose to go directly with CAD tools in core, but answers like
yours prove we need to go step by step. Otherwise, it'll be impossible
to reach a consensus. We need first some good plugin example to find the
best way to go.
So yes, the idea is to make the plugin work better to later integrate it
in core - whatever plugin that is.
Anyhow, any CAD tool will require this change.
Denis
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
