Hey Even, Personally I think this is a good change and handy for the use case you mentioned.
To solve the UX of knowing if the layer is visible in a heavy nested list I think we could grey out, or some kind of icon, for all layers not currently on. Nathan On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 8:32 pm Even Rouault <even.roua...@spatialys.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I've been involved in discussions about improving/changing how visibility > of > layers (or groups) is handled when they are inside groups. Currently if you > check/uncheck a group, this recursively checks/unchecks all its items > (layers > or sub-groups). There are workflows with large projects that include ~ 50 > layers in several groups and where users need to quicly turn on/off the > visibility of groups, but when they don't want to change the visible of > items > inside the group. For those use cases, the layer themes functionnality has > been tested but doesn't solve the need to be able to quickly (1 click) turn > on/off/on/off the visibility of a group to be able to detect changes > between > raster imagery (the human eye is sensitive to movements more than colors), > and > they don't really have predefined configurations (would require creating > tens of > them) > > Basically what is proposed is the following: > > [ ] Group > [x] Layer 1 --> Layer checked but group is not --> invisible > [ ] Layer 2 > > [x] Group > [x] Layer 1 --> Layer checked and group too --> visible > [ ] Layer 2 > > There's a ticket https://hub.qgis.org/issues/14547 about that. > > In the ticket it is suggested that the current behaviour might be > preserved by > using control-click. Control-click on a group would check/uncheck > recursively > all sub-items. > > One effect of this change is that there wouldn't be anymore a tri-state > for a > group. It is either checked or unchecked. One potential downside of the new > behaviour would be that it might not be immediately obvious to determine > the > visibility of a layer if you have several levels of hiearchy : looking > only at > the layer item if it is checked isn't sufficient to tell about its > visibility. > Not sure if that's an issue though (and if so what could be ways of > indicating > the visibility state) > > At the API level, from what I can see, > * Qt::CheckState QgsLayerTreeGroup::isVisible() would be renamed to bool > isChecked() since it would be a binary state and not related to visibility. > I'm not sure if there are users outside of the layer tree mechanism where > we > really need to want if a group is visible (ie all its subgroups and layers > are > visible ?). Wouldn't be hard to implement anyway > * Qt::CheckState QgsLayerTreeLayer::isVisible() would be "split" into a > bool > isChecked() and a bool isVisible(). The later would inspect recursively its > parents to figure out the final visibility state. > > Thoughts ? > > Even > > > -- > Spatialys - Geospatial professional services > http://www.spatialys.com > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
