Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

 >
> > 2015-03-30 14:38 GMT+02:00 Giuseppe Aruta 
> mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> 
> <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>>:
> >
> > Some datasource-less layers can be in the middle of an 
> analysis, and not having any value/interest to save into the project.
> > For instance:"Layer A (datasource layer)  generates Layer B( 
> datasource-less layer), which generates Layer C ( datasource-less layer), 
> which generates End Layer D"( datasource-less layer).
> > Where probably only Layer A and D are of any interest in the 
> project.t
> >
> > I feel we should give the user to understand which /_layer_/ 
> has a datasource or not. But also which /_file _/should be committed or not 
> as its layer has been changed.
> >
> > Peppe
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > 2015-03-30 11:07 GMT+02:00  <mailto:edgar.sol...@web.de> <mailto:edgar.sol...@web.de 
> <mailto:edgar.sol...@web.de>>>:
> >
> > actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since 
> creation or last saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to 
> identify datasource-less layers?
> >
> > ..ede
> >
> > On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> > >> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during 
> runtime, so
> > > there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
> > >> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
> > >> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, 
> cause all is well
> > > wrt. >to these)
> > >
> > > Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> > > Peppe
> > >
> > > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta 
> mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> 
> <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>>:
> > >
> > >> @ Ede,
> > >> I also considered to break the lines:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal 
> dimension  was not
> > >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is 
> probably what
> > >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to 
> save lots of
> > >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I 
> should consider
> > >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: 
> I will adopt
> > >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as 
> simple as
> > >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, 
> unsaved,
> > >> modified, num of items).
> > >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) 
> and will work
> > >> around in the future.
> > >>
> > >> @Andrei
> > >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it 
> enable/disable
> > >>
> > >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') 
> suggestions before
> > >> applying any modification
> > >>
> > >> Peppe
> > >> ​
> > >>
> > >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein  <mailto:sst...@geo.uzh.ch> <mailto:sst...@geo.uzh.ch 
> <mailto:sst...@geo.uzh.ch>>>:
> > >>
> > >>>  looks good to me too :)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -- Originalnachricht --
> > >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
> > >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
> > >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
> > >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
> > >>>
> > >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less 
> intrusive now.
> > >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become 
> optional?
> >  

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

>>:
> >
> > actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since
> creation or last saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to
> identify datasource-less layers?
> >
> > ..ede
> >
> > On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> > >> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during
> runtime, so
> > > there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
> > >> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
> > >> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing,
> cause all is well
> > > wrt. >to these)
> > >
> > > Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> > > Peppe
> > >
> > > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta <
> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>:
> > >
> > >> @ Ede,
> > >> I also considered to break the lines:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal
> dimension  was not
> > >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is
> probably what
> > >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to
> save lots of
> > >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I
> should consider
> > >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc:
> I will adopt
> > >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as
> simple as
> > >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer,
> unsaved,
> > >> modified, num of items).
> > >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class)
> and will work
> > >> around in the future.
> > >>
> > >> @Andrei
> > >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it
> enable/disable
> > >>
> > >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others')
> suggestions before
> > >> applying any modification
> > >>
> > >> Peppe
> > >> ​
> > >>
> > >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein  sst...@geo.uzh.ch>>:
> > >>
> > >>>  looks good to me too :)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -- Originalnachricht --
> > >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
> > >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
> > >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
> > >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
> > >>>
> > >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less
> intrusive now.
> > >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become
> optional?
> > >>>
> > >>> Andrei
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
> > >>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi all,
> > >>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips.
> Before
> > >>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
> > >>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
> > >>>
> > >>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ​
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> *c) Layer with no datasource*
> > >>>
> > >>> ​
> > >>> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
> > >>>
> > >>> ​
> > >>> *e) WMS layer*
> > >>>
> 

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

; > Peppe
> >
> > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta  <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>:
> >
> >> @ Ede,
> >> I also considered to break the lines:
> >>
> >>
> >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was 
> not
> >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
> >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save 
> lots of
> >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should 
> consider
> >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I 
> will adopt
> >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
> >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
> >> modified, num of items).
> >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and 
> will work
> >> around in the future.
> >>
> >> @Andrei
> >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
> >>
> >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions 
> before
> >> applying any modification
> >>
> >> Peppe
> >> ​
> >>
> >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein  <mailto:sst...@geo.uzh.ch>>:
> >>
> >>>  looks good to me too :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- Originalnachricht --
> >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
> >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
> >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
> >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
> >>>
> >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive 
> now.
> >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become 
> optional?
> >>>
> >>> Andrei
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
> >>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it <mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before
> >>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
> >>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
> >>>
> >>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *c) Layer with no datasource*
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>> *e) WMS layer*
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *f) Sextante Raster Image Layer​*
> 
> >>> Some notes:
> >>> Vector layers:
> >>> Blu color will show if a layer (with datasource) has been 
> modified.
> >>> Red color will advise that the layer has no datasource
> >>>
> >>> WMS: The 3 lines shows Layer name, URL and CRS
> >>>
> >>> WFS: (not shown) the lines will be 4: layer name, URL, CRS and 
> Number of
> >>> features
> >>>
> >>> Multiple rendered Image loaded via Image Layer manager: actually 
> the
> >>> second line will show only a "Multiple source" text. In the 
> future I would
> >>> like to add the list of the loaded files. Number of items shows 
> the number
> >>> of files
> >>>
> >>> Sextante Layer: it is basically the same as Ren

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

Hi Jukka,
I am going to check in the afternoon
Peppe

2015-03-31 8:46 GMT+02:00 Rahkonen Jukka (MML) <
jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi>:

>  Hi,
>
>
>
> Snapshots do not build, see
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/jump-pilot/files/OpenJUMP_snapshots/OpenJUMP-20150331-r4362.log/download
>
>
>
> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>
>
>
> Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I made an upgrade to OpenJUMP NB, about tooltips
>
> - now tooltips are configurable via "Configure tooltips" option on
> Configure panels
>
> - there are two options:
>
>  a) original JUMP/OpenJUMP minimal tooltip, which displayes only
> number of feature
>
>   This option is set by default when launching OJ for the 1st time
>
>  b)  advanced info tooltip The size is limited to 400px width and long
> file paths are broken in several
>lines. IN this option I saved  different colors (red and blue)
>   to display layer with no datasource and modified layer with
> datasource   in the tooltips
>
> The option choosen by user is saved into workbench-state.xml file, so it
> will be recognized by OJ when it is launched the second time
>
> Please check next OJ build
>
> Giuseppe Aruta
>
>
>
>
>
> 2015-03-30 14:38 GMT+02:00 Giuseppe Aruta :
>
> Some datasource-less layers can be in the middle of an analysis, and not
> having any value/interest to save into the project.
> For instance:"Layer A (datasource layer)  generates Layer B(
> datasource-less layer), which generates Layer C ( datasource-less layer),
> which generates End Layer D"( datasource-less layer).
> Where probably only Layer A and D are of any interest in the project.t
>
> I feel we should give the user to understand which *layer* has a
> datasource or not. But also which *file *should be committed or not as
> its layer has been changed.
>
> Peppe
>
>
>
>
>
> 2015-03-30 11:07 GMT+02:00 :
>
> actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since creation or
> last saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to identify
> datasource-less layers?
>
> ..ede
>
> On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> >> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so
> > there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
> >> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
> >> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is
> well
> > wrt. >to these)
> >
> > Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> > Peppe
> >
> > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta :
> >
> >> @ Ede,
> >> I also considered to break the lines:
> >>
> >>
> >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was not
> >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
> >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save lots
> of
> >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should consider
> >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I will
> adopt
> >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
> >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
> >> modified, num of items).
> >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and will
> work
> >> around in the future.
> >>
> >> @Andrei
> >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
> >>
> >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions before
> >> applying any modification
> >>
> >> Peppe
> >> ​
> >>
> >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein :
> >>
> >>>  looks good to me too :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- Originalnachricht --
> >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
> >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
> >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
> >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
> >>>
> >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive now.
> >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become optional?
> >>>
> >>> Andrei
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
> >>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> I attached some screenshots of a ne

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Rahkonen Jukka (MML)]

Hi,

Snapshots do not build, see 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/jump-pilot/files/OpenJUMP_snapshots/OpenJUMP-20150331-r4362.log/download

-Jukka Rahkonen-

Giuseppe Aruta wrote:

Hi all,
I made an upgrade to OpenJUMP NB, about tooltips
- now tooltips are configurable via "Configure tooltips" option on Configure 
panels
- there are two options:
 a) original JUMP/OpenJUMP minimal tooltip, which displayes only number of 
feature
  This option is set by default when launching OJ for the 1st time
 b)  advanced info tooltip The size is limited to 400px width and long file 
paths are broken in several
   lines. IN this option I saved  different colors (red and blue)
  to display layer with no datasource and modified layer with 
datasource   in the tooltips
The option choosen by user is saved into workbench-state.xml file, so it will 
be recognized by OJ when it is launched the second time
Please check next OJ build
Giuseppe Aruta


2015-03-30 14:38 GMT+02:00 Giuseppe Aruta 
mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>:
Some datasource-less layers can be in the middle of an analysis, and not having 
any value/interest to save into the project.
For instance:"Layer A (datasource layer)  generates Layer B( datasource-less 
layer), which generates Layer C ( datasource-less layer), which generates End 
Layer D"( datasource-less layer).
Where probably only Layer A and D are of any interest in the project.t
I feel we should give the user to understand which layer has a datasource or 
not. But also which file should be committed or not as its layer has been 
changed.
Peppe


2015-03-30 11:07 GMT+02:00 mailto:edgar.sol...@web.de>>:
actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since creation or last 
saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to identify datasource-less 
layers?

..ede

On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
>> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so
> there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
>> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
>> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is well
> wrt. >to these)
>
> Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> Peppe
>
> 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta 
> mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>>:
>
>> @ Ede,
>> I also considered to break the lines:
>>
>>
>> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was not
>> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
>> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save lots of
>> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should consider
>> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I will adopt
>> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
>> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
>> modified, num of items).
>> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and will work
>> around in the future.
>>
>> @Andrei
>> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
>>
>> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions before
>> applying any modification
>>
>> Peppe
>> ​
>>
>> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein 
>> mailto:sst...@geo.uzh.ch>>:
>>
>>>  looks good to me too :)
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Originalnachricht --
>>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
>>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
>>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
>>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
>>>
>>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive now.
>>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become optional?
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
>>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it<mailto:giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before
>>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
>>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
>>>
>>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
>>>
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *c) Layer with no datasource*
>>>
>>> ​
>>> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
>>>
>>> ​
>>> *e) WMS layer*
>>>
>

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

Hi all,
I made an upgrade to OpenJUMP NB, about tooltips
- now tooltips are configurable via "Configure tooltips" option on
Configure panels
- there are two options:
 a) original JUMP/OpenJUMP minimal tooltip, which displayes only number
of feature
  This option is set by default when launching OJ for the 1st time
 b)  advanced info tooltip The size is limited to 400px width and long
file paths are broken in several
   lines. IN this option I saved  different colors (red and blue)
  to display layer with no datasource and modified layer with
datasource   in the tooltips

The option choosen by user is saved into workbench-state.xml file, so it
will be recognized by OJ when it is launched the second time

Please check next OJ build

Giuseppe Aruta


2015-03-30 14:38 GMT+02:00 Giuseppe Aruta :

> Some datasource-less layers can be in the middle of an analysis, and not
> having any value/interest to save into the project.
> For instance:"Layer A (datasource layer)  generates Layer B(
> datasource-less layer), which generates Layer C ( datasource-less layer),
> which generates End Layer D"( datasource-less layer).
> Where probably only Layer A and D are of any interest in the project.t
> I feel we should give the user to understand which *layer* has a
> datasource or not. But also which *file *should be committed or not as
> its layer has been changed.
> Peppe
>
>
> 2015-03-30 11:07 GMT+02:00 :
>
>> actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since creation or
>> last saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to identify
>> datasource-less layers?
>>
>> ..ede
>>
>> On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
>> >> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so
>> > there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
>> >> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
>> >> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is
>> well
>> > wrt. >to these)
>> >
>> > Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
>> > Peppe
>> >
>> > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta :
>> >
>> >> @ Ede,
>> >> I also considered to break the lines:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was not
>> >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
>> >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save lots
>> of
>> >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should consider
>> >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I will
>> adopt
>> >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
>> >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
>> >> modified, num of items).
>> >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and will
>> work
>> >> around in the future.
>> >>
>> >> @Andrei
>> >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
>> >>
>> >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions before
>> >> applying any modification
>> >>
>> >> Peppe
>> >> ​
>> >>
>> >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein :
>> >>
>> >>>  looks good to me too :)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> -- Originalnachricht --
>> >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
>> >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
>> >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
>> >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
>> >>>
>> >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive now.
>> >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become optional?
>> >>>
>> >>> Andrei
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
>> >>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi all,
>> >>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before
>> >>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
>> >>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
>> >>>
>> >>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
>> >>>
>> >>

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

Some datasource-less layers can be in the middle of an analysis, and not
having any value/interest to save into the project.
For instance:"Layer A (datasource layer)  generates Layer B(
datasource-less layer), which generates Layer C ( datasource-less layer),
which generates End Layer D"( datasource-less layer).
Where probably only Layer A and D are of any interest in the project.t
I feel we should give the user to understand which *layer* has a datasource
or not. But also which *file *should be committed or not as its layer has
been changed.
Peppe


2015-03-30 11:07 GMT+02:00 :

> actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since creation or
> last saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to identify
> datasource-less layers?
>
> ..ede
>
> On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> >> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so
> > there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
> >> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
> >> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is
> well
> > wrt. >to these)
> >
> > Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> > Peppe
> >
> > 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta :
> >
> >> @ Ede,
> >> I also considered to break the lines:
> >>
> >>
> >> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was not
> >> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
> >> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save lots
> of
> >> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should consider
> >> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I will
> adopt
> >> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
> >> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
> >> modified, num of items).
> >> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and will
> work
> >> around in the future.
> >>
> >> @Andrei
> >> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
> >>
> >> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions before
> >> applying any modification
> >>
> >> Peppe
> >> ​
> >>
> >> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein :
> >>
> >>>  looks good to me too :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- Originalnachricht --
> >>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
> >>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
> >>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
> >>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
> >>>
> >>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive now.
> >>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become optional?
> >>>
> >>> Andrei
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
> >>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before
> >>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
> >>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
> >>>
> >>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *c) Layer with no datasource*
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>> *e) WMS layer*
> >>>
> >>> ​
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *f) Sextante Raster Image Layer​*
> >>> Some notes:
> >>> Vector layers:
> >>> Blu color will show if a layer (with datasource) has been modified.
> >>> Red color will advise that the layer has no datasource
> >>>
> >>> WMS: The 3 lines shows Layer name, URL and CRS
> >>>
> >>> WFS: (not shown) the lines will be 4: layer name, URL, CRS and Number
> of
> >>> features
> >>>
> >>> Multiple rendered Image loaded via Image Layer manager: actually the
> >>> second line will show only a "Multiple source" text. In

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

actually just one * should suffice for any modified (since creation or last 
saved) layer. or is there any advantage for users to identify datasource-less 
layers?

..ede

On 30.03.2015 09:48, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
>> - layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so
> there is a >probability that the user wants to save those)
>> - layers with datasource and unsaved change *
>> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is well
> wrt. >to these)
> 
> Going back to this proposal, It looks good for me.
> Peppe
> 
> 2015-03-27 8:21 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta :
> 
>> @ Ede,
>> I also considered to break the lines:
>>
>>
>> I dropped this ways as the problem of tooltip areal dimension  was not
>> solved: long path will create huge tooltips. Which is probably what
>> confuses an user, especially people who have the attitude to save lots of
>> files in lots of folder/subfolders/(su-sub-folders).  I should consider
>> more variabilities: length of tooltip, font dimentions, etc: I will adopt
>> Michael's idea ("simple is better") and use a tooltip as simple as
>> possible, but showing the most useful information (layer, unsaved,
>> modified, num of items).
>> Anyhow I will save the old code (in LayerNameRenderer.class) and will work
>> around in the future.
>>
>> @Andrei
>> the tooltip stays. I will study a way to make it enable/disable
>>
>> I am waiting Jukka and Michael's (possibly others') suggestions before
>> applying any modification
>>
>> Peppe
>> ​
>>
>> 2015-03-26 23:49 GMT+01:00 sstein :
>>
>>>  looks good to me too :)
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Originalnachricht --
>>> *Von: *Andrei Nacu
>>> *Datum: *26.03.2015 13:14
>>> *An: *OpenJump develop and use;
>>> *Betreff:*Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again
>>>
>>> I like the proposed tooltips. They look better and less intrusive now.
>>> Will the new tooltip stay as it is now, or will it become optional?
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   On Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:35 PM, Giuseppe Aruta <
>>> giuseppe_ar...@yahoo.it> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before
>>> applying changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
>>> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
>>>
>>> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
>>>
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *c) Layer with no datasource*
>>>
>>> ​
>>> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
>>>
>>> ​
>>> *e) WMS layer*
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *f) Sextante Raster Image Layer​*
>>> Some notes:
>>> Vector layers:
>>> Blu color will show if a layer (with datasource) has been modified.
>>> Red color will advise that the layer has no datasource
>>>
>>> WMS: The 3 lines shows Layer name, URL and CRS
>>>
>>> WFS: (not shown) the lines will be 4: layer name, URL, CRS and Number of
>>> features
>>>
>>> Multiple rendered Image loaded via Image Layer manager: actually the
>>> second line will show only a "Multiple source" text. In the future I would
>>> like to add the list of the loaded files. Number of items shows the number
>>> of files
>>>
>>> Sextante Layer: it is basically the same as Rendered Image (3 lines,
>>> layer, file, number of items. I would like to change the icon. Both icons
>>> are very similar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
>>> sponsored
>>> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub
>>> for all
>>> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership
>>> blogs to
>>> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
>>> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
>>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.source

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

did you consider breaking long lines (most likely long path names)? 

..ede

On 26.03.2015 17:35, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> Hi all,
> I attached some screenshots of a new proposal for tooltips. Before applying
> changes OJ NB I would like your opinion about.
> The tooltips are reduced to 3 lines, except WFS (see later)
> 
> *a) layers with datasource and no unsaved change*
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *b) layers with datasource but with unsaved change *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *c) Layer with no datasource*
> 
> ​
> *​d) Rendered Image Layer *
> 
> ​
> *e) WMS layer*
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> *f) Sextante Raster Image Layer​*
> Some notes:
> Vector layers:
> Blu color will show if a layer (with datasource) has been modified.
> Red color will advise that the layer has no datasource
> 
> WMS: The 3 lines shows Layer name, URL and CRS
> 
> WFS: (not shown) the lines will be 4: layer name, URL, CRS and Number of
> features
> 
> Multiple rendered Image loaded via Image Layer manager: actually the second
> line will show only a "Multiple source" text. In the future I would like to
> add the list of the loaded files. Number of items shows the number of files
> 
> Sextante Layer: it is basically the same as Rendered Image (3 lines, layer,
> file, number of items. I would like to change the icon. Both icons are very
> similar
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
> 

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

how about

- layers without datasource ** (are probably created during runtime, so there 
is a probability that the user wants to save those)
- layers with datasource and unsaved change * 
- layers with datasource and no unsaved change (nothing, cause all is well wrt. 
to these)

..ede

On 25.03.2015 19:33, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Using an asterisk after the layer name could be a way to go, but which 
> one would you mark ?
> Initially, we wanted to recognize no-datasource layers, but the usual 
> way of using * would
> suggest to include also layers with datasource and unsaved change ?
> - layers without datasource
> - layers with datasource and unsaved change
> - layers with datasource and no unsaved change
> 
> Michaël
> 
> Le 25/03/2015 16:31, edgar.sol...@web.de a écrit :
>> On 25.03.2015 16:23, Michaël Michaud wrote:
>>> First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate 
>>> in-memory
>>> layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that we
>>> could achieve it using different font/color/background...
>>> Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold, red)/selectable
>>> (italic) information.
>>> Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
>>> write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
>>> Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
>>> name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon / visibility
>>> checkbox / name
>> common desktop software uses an asterisk after the file name eg. 
>> my_file.txt* to signal that this file has unsaved changes.
>>
>> we could do the same after the layer name. .. ede
>>
>> --
>> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, 
>> sponsored
>> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for 
>> all
>> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
>> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
>> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
>> ___
>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>>
> 
> 
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
> 

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Michaël Michaud]

Hi,

Using an asterisk after the layer name could be a way to go, but which 
one would you mark ?
Initially, we wanted to recognize no-datasource layers, but the usual 
way of using * would
suggest to include also layers with datasource and unsaved change ?
- layers without datasource
- layers with datasource and unsaved change
- layers with datasource and no unsaved change

Michaël

Le 25/03/2015 16:31, edgar.sol...@web.de a écrit :
> On 25.03.2015 16:23, Michaël Michaud wrote:
>> First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate in-memory
>> layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that we
>> could achieve it using different font/color/background...
>> Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold, red)/selectable
>> (italic) information.
>> Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
>> write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
>> Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
>> name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon / visibility
>> checkbox / name
> common desktop software uses an asterisk after the file name eg. my_file.txt* 
> to signal that this file has unsaved changes.
>
> we could do the same after the layer name. .. ede
>
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Andrei Nacu]

Hi,
I would also prefer the tooltip to be optional. For my work (mostly small and 
medium scale historical, physical and political maps) the tooltip is not really 
necessary. If I want to check the number of items in a layer I normally use the 
Crtl+A command. 
Regards,Andrei 


 On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 6:42 PM, Giuseppe Aruta 
 wrote:
   

 Going back to to differentiate Layerable

The list should be:
- Layer.class
a) layers which already have a datasource
b) layers with no datasource (layers in memory)
c) layers of type a) which have been modified and not saved
d) layers of type b) which have been modified and not saved

- RaferenceImage
no need for now to distinguish as we don't have referencedImage layer which are 
only in memory. It depends on what we want to do with this types of layer

-RasterImageLayer
Before Alberto modifications there was a problem as we used to have
a) Images with datasource
b) Images with no datasource (WarpImageToFence and ExportPartOfImge plugins). 
It was not a big problem as only two Pirols plugins were involved. Note that OJ 
still didn't have an option on "Closing Project/Program" that warn users if a 
"Sextante Raster Image Layer" was in memory or not.
After Alberto's modifications all Raster Layer are saved to OS/TEMP(*) folder 
so there is no need of that warning. So we only have option a)

(*) I am going to modify this and introduce an option to set a default output 
raster folder, like in GvSIG. And a unique ID to add to ouput temporary files 
(like in Kosmo) to prevent a) to loose files in TEMP folder if user is not 
aware and shut down the PC (expecially in Linux/MacOSX), b) to overwrite 
existing files with the same name (the actual used method LayerManager.class 
uniqueLayerName(String name) seems to have a problem with Raster layers loaded 
via Sextante)



2015-03-25 16:31 GMT+01:00 :

On 25.03.2015 16:23, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate in-memory
> layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that we
> could achieve it using different font/color/background...
> Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold, red)/selectable
> (italic) information.
> Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
> write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
> Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
> name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon / visibility
> checkbox / name

common desktop software uses an asterisk after the file name eg. my_file.txt* 
to signal that this file has unsaved changes.

we could do the same after the layer name. .. ede

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel



--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel


  --
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

Going back to to differentiate Layerable

The list should be:
- Layer.class
a) layers which already have a datasource
b) layers with no datasource (layers in memory)
c) layers of type a) which have been modified and not saved
d) layers of type b) which have been modified and not saved

- RaferenceImage
no need for now to distinguish as we don't have referencedImage layer which
are only in memory. It depends on what we want to do with this types of
layer

-RasterImageLayer
Before Alberto modifications there was a problem as we used to have
a) Images with datasource
b) Images with no datasource (WarpImageToFence and ExportPartOfImge
plugins). It was not a big problem as only two Pirols plugins were
involved. Note that OJ still didn't have an option on "Closing
Project/Program" that warn users if a "Sextante Raster Image Layer" was in
memory or not.
After Alberto's modifications all Raster Layer are saved to OS/TEMP(*)
folder so there is no need of that warning. So we only have option a)

(*) I am going to modify this and introduce an option to set a default
output raster folder, like in GvSIG. And a unique ID to add to ouput
temporary files (like in Kosmo) to prevent a) to loose files in TEMP folder
if user is not aware and shut down the PC (expecially in Linux/MacOSX), b)
to overwrite existing files with the same name (the actual used method
LayerManager.class uniqueLayerName(String name) seems to have a problem
with Raster layers loaded via Sextante)



2015-03-25 16:31 GMT+01:00 :

> On 25.03.2015 16:23, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> > First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate
> in-memory
> > layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that
> we
> > could achieve it using different font/color/background...
> > Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold,
> red)/selectable
> > (italic) information.
> > Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
> > write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
> > Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
> > name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon /
> visibility
> > checkbox / name
>
> common desktop software uses an asterisk after the file name eg.
> my_file.txt* to signal that this file has unsaved changes.
>
> we could do the same after the layer name. .. ede
>
>
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for
> all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs
> to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

On 25.03.2015 16:23, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate in-memory
> layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that we
> could achieve it using different font/color/background...
> Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold, red)/selectable
> (italic) information.
> Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
> write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
> Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
> name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon / visibility
> checkbox / name

common desktop software uses an asterisk after the file name eg. my_file.txt* 
to signal that this file has unsaved changes.

we could do the same after the layer name. .. ede

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Michaël Michaud]

Hi,

No need to hurry up, Peppe. Just want to discuss this point and to make
it evolve in a concerted manner.

First of all, I fully understand your initial need to differentiate 
in-memory

layers from persistent layers. I also need this feature and thought that we
could achieve it using different font/color/background...
Not so easy indeed as it may be combined with editable bold, 
red)/selectable

(italic) information.
Maybe we could use a different background for persisted layers (or just
write them with a bold font...). It would not be too difficult to test.
Another (more complex) solution would be to add a column in the layer
name panel : datasource icon (+ tooltip for name) / style icon / visibility
checkbox / name

@Jukka, I also often use the "feature count" tooltip. It is not very 
easy to justify
why we should keep this information and not that one, but experience 
tends to
prove that this one should stay. Filename datasource or wms url are also 
very
useful, but their name can be very long and finally, I think I'd rather 
not have it
in the tooltip. I would not mind to have it in a tooltip associated with 
the layer

name appearing on the top of context menu though.

@Ede, whether for website or for software, I generally prefer bare 
design where
things are hidden but easy to access (from my point of view, google main 
search
page is a model), than design where everything you can do is shown at 
first place
and where what you really need is hard to find (you'll easily find 
examples ;-)


Proposal :
- changing font/background of persistent layers
- just keep # of features and move current tooltip to the  layer name on 
top of the

context menu
- other solutions to explore (making tooltip optional, creating a new 
column

in the layerNamePanel...),

Michaël




Le 25/03/2015 14:18, Giuseppe Aruta a écrit :
I added the new tooltip as I needed to check which layer (Layer.class) 
was already saved as file and which was still in memory: I found that, 
if I was using several tools (= creating several layers in memory), 
than the list was quite long and I (the user) had only the right-click 
option (or closing the project) to reselect the layer  needed.
Than I realized that other infos should be  useful for user, file path 
for instance. That's why the tooltip took that size.

To plan the size I only checked on Kosmo code.
Again. I can revert modifications and make this new more informative 
tooltip as an option.
So user can choose whether they want to know only the feature-count 
(the OJ 1.6 tooltip) or more information (actual OJ NB).


@Jukka. Sextante Raster Image Layer has already a more informative 
right-click plugin. It is called Raster Layer Property. I probably put 
more info that an user needed [more that other OpenSource GIS 
probabily ;)] but they cover any possible need we can find (path, 
raster, extension). I'd probably add a new panel for the raster cell 
statistics (which actually is an independent plugin). One of the 
potential of this raster property plugin is that all the info can be 
saved as an HTML file: I adopted a conservative solution using 
panels/frames already embedded into OJ (no need of extra one)
 I agree with you that Layer.class property panel should be updated. 
And also WMS probably need a similar panel, even if actually some wms 
info are displayed using "Edit WMS layer" or the 
BeanTool>Display_WMS_url.
Anyhow a common solution for all the type of layerable should be 
welcome (to make life easier for users)


my 2 cents

Peppe



2015-03-25 10:58 GMT+01:00 Rahkonen Jukka (MML) 
>:


Hi,

I think that I agree with Michaël. I use frequently the tooltip
for checking  the feature count on vector layers. From the new
info items the source path would also be frequently interesting.
For the image layers source path is good and for WMS layers the
url. Url should rather be shown without basic auth
username:password but I guess that it comes as such from the system.

Other information could well be available from Right click - Layer
properties which should be available with the same name and icon
also for WMS and Sextante raster layers.

-Jukka Rahkonen-

Michaël Michaud wrote:


> Hey,

> Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who
tested a fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why
we added this extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
> I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too
intrusive, and it should be made either optional or available
through the right click menu only. What other users say ?

My 2 cents,

Michaël


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel
Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with
Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel soft

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

I added the new tooltip as I needed to check which layer (Layer.class) was
already saved as file and which was still in memory: I found that, if I was
using several tools (= creating several layers in memory), than the list
was quite long and I (the user) had only the right-click option (or closing
the project) to reselect the layer  needed.
Than I realized that other infos should be  useful for user, file path for
instance. That's why the tooltip took that size.
To plan the size I only checked on Kosmo code.
Again. I can revert modifications and make this new more informative
tooltip as an option.
So user can choose whether they want to know only the feature-count (the OJ
1.6 tooltip) or more information (actual OJ NB).

@Jukka. Sextante Raster Image Layer has already a more informative
right-click plugin. It is called Raster Layer Property. I probably put more
info that an user needed [more that other OpenSource GIS probabily ;)] but
they cover any possible need we can find (path, raster, extension). I'd
probably add a new panel for the raster cell statistics (which actually is
an independent plugin). One of the potential of this raster property plugin
is that all the info can be saved as an HTML file: I adopted a conservative
solution using panels/frames already embedded into OJ (no need of extra one)
 I agree with you that Layer.class property panel should be updated. And
also WMS probably need a similar panel, even if actually some wms info are
displayed using "Edit WMS layer" or the BeanTool>Display_WMS_url.
Anyhow a common solution for all the type of layerable should be welcome
(to make life easier for users)

my 2 cents

Peppe



2015-03-25 10:58 GMT+01:00 Rahkonen Jukka (MML) <
jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi>:

> Hi,
>
> I think that I agree with Michaël. I use frequently the tooltip for
> checking  the feature count on vector layers. From the new info items the
> source path would also be frequently interesting. For the image layers
> source path is good and for WMS layers the url. Url should rather be shown
> without basic auth username:password but I guess that it comes as such from
> the system.
>
> Other information could well be available from Right click - Layer
> properties which should be available with the same name and icon also for
> WMS and Sextante raster layers.
>
> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>
> Michaël Michaud wrote:
>
>
> > Hey,
>
> > Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested a
> fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added this
> extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
> > I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too
> intrusive, and it should be made either optional or available through the
> right click menu only. What other users say ?
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Michaël
>
>
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
> your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
> leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
> look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for
> all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs
> to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Rahkonen Jukka (MML)]

Hi,

I think that I agree with Michaël. I use frequently the tooltip for checking  
the feature count on vector layers. From the new info items the source path 
would also be frequently interesting. For the image layers source path is good 
and for WMS layers the url. Url should rather be shown without basic auth 
username:password but I guess that it comes as such from the system.

Other information could well be available from Right click - Layer properties 
which should be available with the same name and icon also for WMS and Sextante 
raster layers.

-Jukka Rahkonen-

Michaël Michaud wrote:


> Hey,

> Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested a 
> fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added this 
> extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
> I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too intrusive, 
> and it should be made either optional or available through the right click 
> menu only. What other users say ?

My 2 cents,

Michaël

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored 
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all 
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to 
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

Or, better, optional -by an option panel -
a) default option: the original one (only number of items)
b) advanced option: the one with all the info about path, number of items,
etc

2015-03-25 10:41 GMT+01:00 Giuseppe Aruta :

> I am sorry Michaël,
> in the last days I had few time to look at it. It will be fixed in a
> couple of days (shorter and probably optional)
> Peppe
>
>
> 2015-03-25 0:32 GMT+01:00 Michaël Michaud :
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested
>> a fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added
>> this extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
>> I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too
>> intrusive, and
>> it should be made either optional or available through the right click
>> menu
>> only. What other users say ?
>>
>> My 2 cents,
>>
>> Michaël
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
>> sponsored
>> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub
>> for all
>> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership
>> blogs to
>> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
>> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
>> ___
>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>>
>
>
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Giuseppe Aruta]

I am sorry Michaël,
in the last days I had few time to look at it. It will be fixed in a couple
of days (shorter and probably optional)
Peppe


2015-03-25 0:32 GMT+01:00 Michaël Michaud :

> Hey,
>
> Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested
> a fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added
> this extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
> I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too
> intrusive, and
> it should be made either optional or available through the right click menu
> only. What other users say ?
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Michaël
>
>
> --
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for
> all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs
> to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> ___
> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
>
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

Re: [JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[edgar . soldin]

On 25.03.2015 00:32, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested
> a fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added
> this extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
> I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too 
> intrusive, and
> it should be made either optional or available through the right click menu
> only. What other users say ?
> 

what do you mean by "through the right click menu"?

while Peppe didn't come around to it yet, wouldn't shrinking it to double the 
layertreepanels width suffice?

what exactly bothers your user friend? that it pops up, it's size so he cannot 
see the map or layernames? 

.. not a user, ede :) 

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel

[JPP-Devel] Tooltip again

[Michaël Michaud]

Hey,

Sorry to insist, but today, I get some feedback from a user who tested
a fresh version of OpenJUMP, and immediately asked me why we added
this extra-large yellow tooltip on layer names.
I think it displays useful information, but it is currently too 
intrusive, and
it should be made either optional or available through the right click menu
only. What other users say ?

My 2 cents,

Michaël

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
___
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel