After thinking on it a bit, I agree that Manish' suggestion could be a
good idea as an option (the way /additionalDetails.html/ is an option).
It would be easier if they were /.png/ files rather than formal icon
files only with a "width x length" limit.
My two cents,
Russ
On 09/28/2016 12:57 AM, Manish Gupta 8 wrote:
I think one of the things that will really help in complex data flow
from UI perspective is “colored icons” on each processor. Not sure if
this already part of 1.0, but from my experience, icons definitely
help a lot in quickly understanding complex flows. Those icons can be
fixed (embedded within the nar) or may be dynamic (user defined icon
file for different processors) – just a suggestion.
Regards,
Manish
*From:*Andrew Grande [mailto:apere...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:40 PM
*To:* users@nifi.apache.org
*Subject:* Re: UI: feedback on the processor 'color' in NiFi 1.0
No need to go wild, changing processor colors should be enough, IMO.
PG and RPG are possible candidates, but they are different enough
already, I guess.
What I heard quite often was to differentiate between regular
processors, incoming sources of data and out only (data producers?).
Maybe even with a shape?
Andrew
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016, 12:35 PM Rob Moran <rmo...@gmail.com
<mailto:rmo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Good points. I was thinking a label would be tied to the group of
components to which it was applied, but that could also introduce
problems as things move and are added to a flow.
So would you all expect to be able to change the color of every
component type, or just processors?
Andrew - your comment about coloring terminators red is
interesting as well. What are some other parts of a flow you might
use color to identify? Along with backpressure, we could explore
other ways to call these things out so users do not come up with
their own methods. Perhaps there are layer options, like on a map
(e.g., "show terrain" or "show traffic").
Rob
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Grande
<apere...@gmail.com <mailto:apere...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I agree. Labels are great for grouping, beyond PGs. Processor
colors individually add value. E.g. flow terminator colored in
red was a very common pattern I used. Besides, labels are not
grouped with components, so moving things and re-arranging is
a pain.
Andrew
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016, 11:21 AM Joe Skora <jsk...@gmail.com
<mailto:jsk...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Rob,
The labelling functionality you described sounds very
useful in general. But, I miss the processor color too.
I think labels are really useful for identifying groups of
components and areas in the flow, but I worry that needing
to use them in volume for processor coloring will increase
the API and browser canvas load for elements that don't
actually affect the flow.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Rob Moran
<rmo...@gmail.com <mailto:rmo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
What if we promote the use of Labels as a way to
highlight things. We could add functionality to expand
their usefulness as a way to highlight things on the
canvas. I believe that is their intended use.
Today you can create a label and change its color to
highlight single or multiple components. Even better
you can do it for any component (not just processors).
To expand on functionality, I'm imagining a context
menu and palette action to "Label" a selected
component or components. This would prompt a user to
pick a background and add text which would place a
label around everything once it's applied.
Rob
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Jeff
<jtsw...@gmail.com <mailto:jtsw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I was thinking, in addition to changing the color
of the icon on the processor, that the color of
the drop shadow could be changed as well. That
would provide more contrast, but preserve
readability, in my opinion.
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:39 PM Andrew Grande
<apere...@gmail.com <mailto:apere...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
Hi All,
Rolling with UI feedback threads. This time
I'd like to discuss how NiFi 'lost' its
ability to change processor boxes color. I.e.
as you can see from a screenshot attached, it
does change color for the processor in the
flow overview panel, but the processor itself
only changes the icon in the top-left of the
box. I came across a few users who definitely
miss the old way. I personally think changing
the icon color for the processor doesn't go
far enough, especially when one is dealing
with a flow of several dozen processors, zooms
in and out often. The overview helps, but it's
not the same.
Proposal - can we restore how color selection
for the processor changed the actual
background of the processor box on the canvas?
Let the user go wild with colors and deal with
readability, but at least it's easy to spot
'important' things this way. And with
multi-tenant authorization it becomes a
poor-man's doc between teams, to an extent.
Thanks for any feedback,
Andrew
