Tough words about GUI

[j_c_hallgren]

The only thing I can say about the "OK" button is that without it, it's may be presumed that one has to use the "X" to close it and that presents a much smaller target, while having an "OK" means that user knows they can just hit 'enter' to close or use mouse with a larger target...

I've seen all kinds of these "About" things and there isn't total consistency and with a handful, I've had trouble determining immediately how to exit from it....so what may be seen as unneeded can be helpful to those who aren't familiar with 'click anywhere' style.

[admin]

The OK button is very common in About boxes. And I'm not here to invent a better About box.

Concerning the space please note that the About box of the trial has some more and different contents:

[zer0]

I guess I can take heart from the "OK" button's migration to the east And maybe we will be allowed to use a large icon resource to customize XY's logo on "About" box too?

[zer0]

In the latest beta, Action Log gets 2 lines per entry. However, with date stamps turned off, the AL entries look fugly (screenshot below).

action_log.png (16.26 KiB) Viewed 2189 times

Different alignments for numbers, icon and description make it awkward to read information. Numbers are aligned to the top vertically and to the right horizontally. Icons are centred along both axis. Descriptions are aligned to the bottom vertically and to the left horizontally. Could there please be some consistency? Preferably, numbers should be centred along both axis and descriptions along vertical if there are no time stamps.

[admin]

I forgot about that option... ... so I think without any datestamp there is no much point in a 2-line display...

OR, the Action Log dialog shows datestamp always.

[nas8e9]

In the latest beta, Action Log gets 2 lines per entry. However, with date stamps turned off, the AL entries look fugly (screenshot below).

action_log.png

Different alignments for numbers, icon and description make it awkward to read information. Numbers are aligned to the top vertically and to the right horizontally. Icons are centred along both axis. Descriptions are aligned to the bottom vertically and to the left horizontally. Could there please be some consistency? Preferably, numbers should be centred along both axis and descriptions along vertical if there are no time stamps.

I agree about the inconsistent alignment. Just curious: why disable the time stamps?

[admin]

I decided this way:

Code: Select all

    * Action Log: Now when "Date format in action labels" is set to "No 
      date" this setting is ignored in the Action Log window (but 
      respected in related Toolbar button tooltips and dropdowns). 
      Otherwise the 2-line layout breaks.

[zer0]

Just curious: why disable the time stamps?

I personally have no need for time stamps in the Action Log. What kind of action was applied to what and where are much more important to me as they form the basis of my decision whether or not to undo/redo said action. Time stamps are nice to have when we're talking actions from several days/weeks ago -- for comparison and contrasting -- but in the short term they are non-essential information for yours truly.

I decided this way:

Code: Select all

    * Action Log: Now when "Date format in action labels" is set to "No 
      date" this setting is ignored in the Action Log window (but 
      respected in related Toolbar button tooltips and dropdowns). 
      Otherwise the 2-line layout breaks.

Hmm, that's bad Why was there a need to change to a 2-line layout? Why should Action Log show time stamp information at all times? If a user turned them off on purpose for tooltips and drop-downs, why are they forced down their throat/eyes in AL window?

[admin]

Just curious: why disable the time stamps?

I personally have no need for time stamps in the Action Log. What kind of action was applied to what and where are much more important to me as they form the basis of my decision whether or not to undo/redo said action. Time stamps are nice to have when we're talking actions from several days/weeks ago -- for comparison and contrasting -- but in the short term they are non-essential information for yours truly.

I decided this way:

Code: Select all

    * Action Log: Now when "Date format in action labels" is set to "No 
      date" this setting is ignored in the Action Log window (but 
      respected in related Toolbar button tooltips and dropdowns). 
      Otherwise the 2-line layout breaks.

Hmm, that's bad Why was there a need to change to a 2-line layout? Why should Action Log show time stamp information at all times? If a user turned them off on purpose for tooltips and drop-downs, why are they forced down their throat/eyes in AL window?

Timestamps are essential information in a log. They are the number one criterion for the log organization. Your personal taste is hard to understand and I expect it to be rather unique.

[zer0]

Timestamps are essential information in a log. They are the number one criterion for the log organization. Your personal taste is hard to understand and I expect it to be rather unique.

True, time stamps may be useful for log organisation. However, Action Log is already organised to show the most recent actions first, so time stamps are there purely for further clarification (and some may not said clarification). And a user can't apply any actions to those time stamps, so just how much organisation can one do? In addition, with a 2-line layout, copying all items in the AL creates an unorthodox list with the timestamps separating the lines, which makes it difficult to import into any spreadsheet/database application

[zer0]

I see that you went ahead with the change regardless

Genuinely though, why must there be a 2-line display? Why are time stamps shown in bold? And -- what perhaps ticks me off the most -- why are time stamps changed to "Datestamp of action" when going from "Age of action (how long ago)" to "No date"? So, not only is the setting not respected -- and that's a big deal -- but you are also showing us date stamps in a format that we may not like/be used to. This all seems to be more trouble than it's worth

[admin]

I see that you went ahead with the change regardless

Genuinely though, why must there be a 2-line display? Why are time stamps shown in bold? And -- what perhaps ticks me off the most -- why are time stamps changed to "Datestamp of action" when going from "Age of action (how long ago)" to "No date"? So, not only is the setting not respected -- and that's a big deal -- but you are also showing us date stamps in a format that we may not like/be used to. This all seems to be more trouble than it's worth

Live with it. I won't discuss everything I do.

[zer0]

Live with it. I won't discuss everything I do.

Aside from being slightly harsh -- I'll let that go -- where is the logic?

I respect the fact that you don't have to discuss your reasoning, but still... There doesn't seem to be anyone (apart from yourself ) vocal in the forum who is in favour of dual-line and mandatory stamps approaches. Understandably, there could be a big licensee of yours who has asked for this feature via email or other means, in which case it's tough luck on me/others as we don't swing as much influence. However, what good are selective disrespect of a setting and strong-arming a user into a date format of your choosing? I appreciate that with no date stamps the 2-line layout breaks and it's more work for you if you were to cater for such a situation. But isn't it better to put that extra work in to make sure that both sides are happy and, more importantly, the correct thing -- from a standpoint of respecting settings -- is done?

[zer0]

Addition of custom "Previewed Formats" (see attached screenshot) could have been handled better GUI-wise by adding functionality to add to existing lists rather than to create CSV lists. Such functionality would have been best-placed just below the description of "Previewed Formats", aligned along the left edge.

Its format should be as follows: [one-line text area for custom extensions] [drop-down with the content types] [tickbox with "Enable" caption, ticked by default] [button with the "Add" caption]

This approach has several advantages over what is currently implemented:

-- It uses less space, which will allow longer lists to be displayed.
-- It allows custom extensions to be added without being enabled, as currently possible with factory-included extensions.
-- Likewise, by being in an existing list, they can be disabled without being removed, which saves work when re-enabling.
-- It uses existing lists rather than adding new ones -> better efficiency.
-- Presumably added extensions would slot into specified lists in alphabetical order, which would make it easier to manage them as CVS lists can't be ordered by such criteria.
-- The suggested addition process is linear and easy to follow.
-- Column lists are easier to comprehend and use because of their one-item-per-line layout. Current CSV text boxes do not lend themselves well in this respect.

previewed_formats.png (32.29 KiB) Viewed 2103 times

[admin]

Agreed!

I would skip the [tickbox with "Enable" caption, ticked by default] though, and allow to add several extensions at once as a comma-separated list. The user-added extensions in the list should be printed in a special color (marked color #2). And there should be a way to remove a user-added extension from the list (disabling would be effectively the same, but user will ask for removing).

Planned for 9.20.