Suggestion: Hide Info Panel Tabs w/o content

inghamc · Post by **inghamc** » 16 Jan 2008 18:37

For example, the "Version", Preview" and "Raw View" tabs are superflous for File Folders, as they don't contain any information and therefore don't provide any value.

This would both make an already clean interface even cleaner and remove the disappointment of clicking a tab (especially Preview) only to see that nothing is available.

Thanks again!

Post by **serendipity** » 16 Jan 2008 18:43

You mean when I click on "Version", Preview" or "Raw View" when a folder is selected, XY should auto-hide the Info panel?

Post by **j_c_hallgren** » 16 Jan 2008 18:48

Is this really a problem? Just wondering...cause I'd say that 99% of the time, I have a file selected, either by default or my selection...and when I'm on a folder, I have no reason to use these tabs so I just ignore them...or if I do click on it, and not see anything, it's a reminder that I'm likely not positioned where I want to be...having them not be there would be, IMO, confusing as the display layout would then change...and I may be wanting to do a File Find, so hiding IP would hinder that...

inghamc · Post by **inghamc** » 16 Jan 2008 20:23

Sorry - I wasn't suggesting hiding the info panel - just limiting its available tabs to those that provide value based on the selection.

I don't think this would be confusing, except for the case I hadn't considered of using the up/down arrow keys in the List and having the Tab change (to Properties?) if "Preview" wasn't available for a given item (and then change back? This could be confusing...).

Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.

Post by **j_c_hallgren** » 16 Jan 2008 20:29

inghamc wrote:Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.

Now that's something which, if possible, would be acceptable to me as long time XY user...I've noticed this particularily on the Version tab, but it wasn't enough of an issue to cause me to post it.

Post by **serendipity** » 16 Jan 2008 20:39

inghamc wrote:Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.

Even though I have a fair idea of which item needs which IP tab, I see your solution as optimum.
This is especially true for newbies who will not waste their time poking at those info-less tabs when they see they're greyed out. By the way, this can be implemented in regular tabs too (dead paths).

Post by **admin** » 16 Jan 2008 20:45

serendipity wrote:
inghamc wrote:Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.
Even though I have a fair idea of which item needs which IP tab, I see your solution as optimum.
This is especially true for newbies who will not waste their time poking at those info-less tabs when they see they're greyed out. By the way, this can be implemented in regular tabs too (dead paths).

I'm thinking about this since 1997!

Grey out was the best I could come up with but it is not good enough, because it measn disabled. But there are not disabled...

Post by **serendipity** » 16 Jan 2008 20:53

admin wrote:
serendipity wrote:
inghamc wrote:Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.
Even though I have a fair idea of which item needs which IP tab, I see your solution as optimum.
This is especially true for newbies who will not waste their time poking at those info-less tabs when they see they're greyed out. By the way, this can be implemented in regular tabs too (dead paths).
I'm thinking about this since 1997! Grey out was the best I could come up with but it is not good enough, because it measn disabled. But there are not disabled...

You mean for the regular tabs or IP tabs?

Post by **admin** » 16 Jan 2008 21:05

serendipity wrote:
admin wrote:
serendipity wrote:
inghamc wrote:Perhaps the best compromise would be to grey the labels of unpopulated Tabs so a user can know at a glance what information is available.
Even though I have a fair idea of which item needs which IP tab, I see your solution as optimum.
This is especially true for newbies who will not waste their time poking at those info-less tabs when they see they're greyed out. By the way, this can be implemented in regular tabs too (dead paths).
I'm thinking about this since 1997! Grey out was the best I could come up with but it is not good enough, because it measn disabled. But there are not disabled...
You mean for the regular tabs or IP tabs?

IP. Especially the version tab: you cannot say from the file name whether an EXE has a version info or not. So it would be nice if the tab somehow told me without needing to open it. I never found a way that satisfied me GUI-wise.

Post by **j_c_hallgren** » 16 Jan 2008 21:06

admin wrote:I'm thinking about this since 1997! Grey out was the best I could come up with but it is not good enough, because it measn disabled. But there are not disabled...

While it may be technically true that they are not "disabled", but since they contain NO valid information, what's the difference? So....You could maybe thus just as well block clicking on them if they're grayed out, so they would in fact be truely disabled.

Post by **admin** » 16 Jan 2008 21:14

j_c_hallgren wrote:
admin wrote:I'm thinking about this since 1997! Grey out was the best I could come up with but it is not good enough, because it measn disabled. But there are not disabled...
While it may be technically true that they are not "disabled", but since they contain NO valid information, what's the difference? So....You could maybe thus just as well block clicking on them if they're grayed out, so they would in fact be truely disabled.

Too smart. I personally love to open empty tabs once in a while. It's so relaxing for the eyes! Just kidding -- but I always say: "Keep the brain in the user (it's good for him)."

inghamc · Post by **inghamc** » 16 Jan 2008 22:04

j_c_hallgren wrote:While it may be technically true that they are not "disabled", but since they contain NO valid information, what's the difference? So....You could maybe thus just as well block clicking on them if they're grayed out, so they would in fact be truely disabled.

I purposely used "gray" rather than "disable" in my earlier post, because in the use case of arrow-key'ing up and down the List view to look at Previews, you definitely don't want the Info Panel tab to change out from under you at the first entry in the List that doesn't have preview support.

But the more I think about it: allowing the disabled (Preview, in this e.g.) tab to remain displayed, but simply disallowing the user to navigate via keyboard/mouse to disabled tabs (including returning to the first) seems perfectly reasonable and "correct".

If that seems too difficult or confusing (I'd bet it would be much more intuitive to experience than to read about), I don't think graying is a bad, if not 100% conventional, alternative.

The end goal is to make the available information visible, and the unhelpful UI elements at least deaccentuated, if not invisible/inaccessible.

Post by **admin** » 17 Jan 2008 09:01

Sorry, but I don't like any of the ideas mentioned here. The search goes on...

Post by **j_c_hallgren** » 17 Jan 2008 09:27

I thought we'd come up with some things that would work out...oh well!

And you couldn't display the text at a percentage of the normal? In other words, use a dark grey instead of black, so text wouldn't be like UDC menu when no UDC's which is grayed out, but still wouldn't be as intense as whatever color it normally would be, typically black.

BTW, in looking at this again just now, I noticed that the active IP tab doesn't get bolded as does the currently active folder tab...and the explanation is? Given that appears to be an inconsistency...