[Bf-funboard] property panel "switch" section toggles.. thoughts?
hadriscus at gmail.com
Tue Jul 16 21:35:26 CEST 2013
Patrik, your idea of having the toggle inside the panel instead of the
panel header sounds like a good compromise to me. I don't think many would
be bothered by opening up a panel once in a while to see if the function it
gives access to is currently active, in the event that it is forgotten
about in the first place. Say we're speaking about panels in the "render"
tab of the properties editor... when setting up a scene, one would anyway
have most of these panels open at the same time and would be unlikely to
doubt whether, say, AA is on or off. For the panels in the 3Dview, it is
irrelevant : the on/off state of "background images" and "grease pencil"
are easily noted.
On 16 July 2013 21:23, Patrik Andersson <patrik.andersson.se at gmail.com>wrote:
> Nice work Lockal, I like the highlighting of the box.
> I have follow the discussion with a half eye the last days. And a thought
> about the checkboxes in the list have appeared for me. One could easily
> state that It is a mix of two GUI components which is a bit strange for a
> If you are going to use it you will first check that box then open the
> list/panel for making changes. Well if two logical moves would be, if it is
> enable, the the panel will open and when disabled the panel will
> automatically close.
> If nobody else already has mention it, I would like to discuss, why should
> the checkbox exists in the list?
> First if you are going to use it you will probably open the panel, to make
> some changes. So why not have an enable button in the panel?
> Well, then it would be hard for the user to see if the component/function
> is enabled, but it could be easily solved by changing the background-color
> of the "list-item".
> Then why should an enable button exist in each panel, it becomes very
> unorganized. Could it be a good idea to have a list in the top of the main
> panel/Space to select which panels/function/components the user want to be
> enabled and based on that be shown in the panel/space?
> These are my thoughts. Maybe you could pick up some goodies from it or
> just leave it behind.
> Best regards
> On Jul 16, 2013, at 6:13 PM, S A wrote:
> > When de-cluttering the UI it is important to retain some basic details
> > in elements/widgets.
> > I understand the idea of removing triangles: it probably comes from
> > Toolbox element: https://www.google.com/search?q=qtoolbox&tbm=isch
> > The most common implementation of Toolbox is a simple list of buttons,
> > which is a good start: at least it shows that this element is active.
> > On desktop it means, that so called "tabs" react on cursor "enter" and
> > "leave" events. On tablet user is able at least to recognize the shape
> > of button and therefore understand that this element is
> > "touch-sensitive".
> > While blender does not react on mouse hovering over tabs titles, I
> > suppose there is no point to remove expand triangles. Color of tabs
> > could be changed in theme settings, so triangles are essential element
> > to make tabs and static text distinguishable.
> > The other good way to show user the ability to interact with elements
> > is changing the cursor pointer. Every normal gui toolkit changes the
> > pointer shape, for example, when it points to a text field. Changing a
> > cursor shape is could also be useful for tabs.
> > If blender developers manage to make the most of tab-like elements
> > draggable, it could be a good idea to completely remove the right
> > triangle and allow user to move tabs just by moving tab header. This
> > solution is also very touch-friendly: tap once to expand/collapse,
> > drag to move.
> > Summarizing all above, I made a HTML/jQuery page to show the proposed
> > interaction model: http://jsfiddle.net/Lockal/uD5hu/2/embedded/result/
> > -- Sv. Lockal
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Harley Acheson
> > <harley.acheson at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I'm not sure why it's so important to have the panel titles aligned
> >> It is just for the anal amongst us that have a strong *need* to have
> >> line up neatly. It hurts me, just a little, when I have to scan that
> >> and
> >> have some of the items out of line. LOL
> >>> The on/off button and greyed out toggles don't really make things much
> >> more readable.
> >> No, I didn't like it either...
> >>> Perhaps the triangles could be removed and the checkboxes moved in
> >> place
> >> After playing with this for a while I don't think it is likely to find a
> >> way to
> >> remove the triangles. When they are gone, no matter what we do with
> >> the titles, the checkboxes on their own can communicate (wrongly) the
> >> open/closed state of the panel.
> >> For example if you close all panels except for "anti-aliasing" and
> >> motion blur" and turn those features on. If you then remove the
> >> the natural assumption is that the checkboxes signify open. The system
> >> should make sense no matter how you find it.
> >> I think we are stuck with the triangles, and the checkboxes, and
> >> the anal amongst us will probably have to just deal with the
> >> But it is still fun experimenting with this stuff.
> >> Harley
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-funboard mailing list
> >> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-funboard mailing list
> > Bf-funboard at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> Bf-funboard mailing list
> Bf-funboard at blender.org
More information about the Bf-funboard