Let's talk about Favs

[CyGho]

But
(a) you don't browse by catalog only, but also e.g. by tab change, or by clicking a folder link
(b) when you come back to XY after some hours on the beach, do you still know which favorite you clicked before?

This can be one of the main reasons to have 2 different panels: 1 for the normal tree and 1 for the favorites, because the normal tree will always be visible then and reflect the folder your in.
If you choose for a solution that you can switch between the favorites panel and the normal tree panel by tabs, well then you can have a problem indead and must update the catalog with the current focused folder.

btw when I go to the beach, I power down the PC's

[JustinF]

...I used to use ExplorerXP quite a bit and it's tree/groups layout was great (perfect). Like you said you can see both the tree and catalog at the same time, and if you want more tree just hit the "hide catalog" hotkey or toolbar button.

Yes, definitely an option (option (c)). Although that would mean the tree has to do browse work as well. I still would prefer to bypass that.

I must be missing something here. In my mind I was thinking the tree would act just as it does currently, and we'd be adding a favorites panel somewhere. I was thinking that you'd click on an entry in the favorites panel and you'd jump directly to that directory. Seems simple and straight forward to me. Evidently I don't understand what you have in mind.

BTW: I noted that ExplorerXP has a very fast tree. Reason: it does not verify the existence of subfolders of a node but simply assumes subfolders by putting a "plus"-symbol to every node. If the assumption proves wrong the "plus" vanishes on clicking it -- puff.

Don't mimick that behavior, your tree is just fine.

[admin]

... Evidently I don't understand what you have in mind.

Bypassing the tree, with the following advantages:
(1) faster
(2) tree stays where it is, so I don't have to scroll back to search the location I was in before I clicked the favorite

But these are not big things, whereas keeping the tree in synch does obviously solve the "where am I?" problem in the most natural way. so for me this case is solved: option (c)!

[JustinF]

Bypassing the tree, with the following advantages:
(1) faster
(2) tree stays where it is, so I don't have to scroll back to search the location I was in before I clicked the favorite

Ahhhh, ok, I think I understand. See, #2 above would confuse the heck out of me. If I click on a favorite I expect everything to follow me...list and tree; in my mind the list and tree should be tied together, location-wise. That's not to say that's the best way, but it's what I would expect.

[phatmankerr]

Option (c) sounds good to me - gets my vote

[admin]

Small idea en passant: with option (c) we definitely will get the touch-ground-tree, which means the info panel width has to compete with the tree with. My 1st May morning idea: narrow tree! The current tree uses an indent 19 horizontal pixels for each level. That could easily be brought down to 10 pixels or so... another cool XY-only feature? (Optional, of course! )

[JustinF]

My 1st May morning idea: narrow tree!

Your first May idea could turn out to be a good one.

(Optional, of course! )

Good!

[Chris Wood]

So, we have two possible architectures:

(a) tree above; catalog (favs) below [hideable]
(b) a tree tab and a catalog (favs) tab. [tab headers hideable; there will be shortcuts to switch]

I favor (b) at the moment. Why not?!

I'm confused - isn't "option (c)" the same as option (a)? In any case, don't do (b). With (b) you have to click the tab or press the shortcut every time you want to use a favourite. Selecting a favourite should definately be a one-click process - otherwise, you're not speeding things up all that much.

(a)/(c) is also more conducive to advanced behaviours like copying files by dragging them onto a favourite (with (b) you'd have to drag to the tab, wait, and then drag to favourite).

Basically (b) makes everything take three times longer. And it takes more screen space. And makes XYplorer look even more complicated and user-unfriendly.

Small idea en passant: with option (c) we definitely will get the touch-ground-tree, which means the info panel width has to compete with the tree with. My 1st May morning idea: narrow tree! The current tree uses an indent 19 horizontal pixels for each level. That could easily be brought down to 10 pixels or so... another cool XY-only feature? (Optional, of course! )

Absolutely, go for it!

[admin]

I'm confused - isn't "option (c)" the same as option (a)?

Yes, almost. The difference is not in the layout but in the interdependence (synch) between favs and tree location.

I'm now definitely heading towards option (c) (yep, I started the implementation! ): tree above, catalog below (hideable), tree always shows the current path (i.e. it follows the catalog).

[phatmankerr]

Downloaded the latest beta and am sitting her like an idiot with the blank catalog open - looking good by the way - all the different options / layouts seem to work without a hitch.

Just wanted to check is the catalog going to have the same formatting options as the tree highlight color, box color etc.

Just a query really (not bothered either way) just looking forward to the basic functionality.

[admin]

... just looking forward to the basic functionality.

Well, some very basic functionality is there now...

[phatmankerr]

Sorry hadn't downloaded the latest beta when I posted. Apologies

[admin]

Sorry hadn't downloaded the latest beta when I posted. Apologies

No reason too -- your post was before the latest beta

[admin]

I looked at the firefox bookmarks sidebar and saw a nice idea: instead of the horizontal scrollbar the items are end-ellipsed (three dots...). Not bad... any objections?

[CyGho]

I looked at the firefox bookmarks sidebar and saw a nice idea: instead of the horizontal scrollbar the items are end-ellipsed (three dots...). Not bad... any objections?

Just cheched with FF, looks good to me. If I really wanna see the hole text, I drag the right border to the right so no problem.