Lone Wolf Development Forums  

Go Back   Lone Wolf Development Forums > Realm Works Forums > Realm Works Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
MNBlockHead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Twin Cities Area, MN, USA
Posts: 1,325

Old November 18th, 2015, 09:34 PM
This is how I would like the groups and categories pane to look like by default:

RWcollapsed.png

In lieu of being able to customize default collapse/expand states, I would like to be able to get to the above state quickly.

The issue is that groups and categories are handled differently, a paradigm I'm still trying to get used to. To me, they are both still part of a the same navigation GUI. For me, "collapse entire hierarchy" is not collapsing the entire hierarchy, because the groups are part of that hierarchy for all practical purposes (from an end-user, maybe not a developer, perspective).

I've made a macro in a third-party program (PhraseExpress) to accomplish this for me, but it is a little wonky because there is no hot-key for "Collapse All Groups" and I'm unable to collapse all categories in my preference navigation view. Moreover, there is no hotkey to bring up the Group Tools.

Regarding grouping by categories, in the group by simple topics and categories they act as a third, intermediate level.

Lets look at everything fully expanded:

RWexpanded.png

Now, after using the "collapse entire hierarchy (ctrl+-)" option, I get this:

RWpartlycollapsed.png

Sorry guys, but that is not what I expect nor what I want.

At this point, I usually go onto "collapse all groups" (no keyboard shortcut). Yet, if I then expand the events group, I still see the categories it contains expanded. What is frustrating is that there is no "collapse all categories" option, like there is with groups. If I click on the Category Tools button, I see a "collapse category" option, which I would never use because it an extra click and mouse movement to use it than to just collapse it using the carrot button on the category muntin. That's an inconsistency in the interface. I would expect to have a collapse-all-categories option in category tools, just as there is a collapse-all-groups option in the group tools.

Because of this, there is no easy way, short of LOTS of clicks, to really collapse everything.

RW Project: Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition homebrew world
Other Tools: CampaignCartographer, Cityographer, Dungeonographer, Evernote

Last edited by MNBlockHead; November 18th, 2015 at 10:02 PM. Reason: fixed typos
MNBlockHead is offline   #21 Reply With Quote
MNBlockHead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Twin Cities Area, MN, USA
Posts: 1,325

Old November 18th, 2015, 09:58 PM
Let's compare some other software that allows for complex nesting and lots of items.

Below is a screencap of WhizFolders:

WF01.png

The button that the pink arrow points to is the "collapse all button", when I click on it, I get the following:

WF02.png

Nice, everything fully collapsed. Let's expand just one of the top-level items...

WF03.png

The sub-items are collapsed. And so it goes, no matter how far I drill down the nested items. "Collapse All" means collapse all.

I would like "Collapse Entire Hierarchy" in RW to work the same way. Perhaps the issue is that in RW, you have three options for similar topic grouping in the navigation view. I am using "By Simple Grouping and Category."

If I chose simple grouping, I don't have to worry about the intermediary category groupings. I can collapse entire hierarchy and then collapse all groups, but it is still two different operations.

If I select By Category...well, now I've learned something new. If I set my preference to "By Category," the category-tools menu now offers "collapse all categories." So...why isn't that option available when my preference is "By Simple Grouping and Category"? In any event, with the by-category preference, you still have to perform two operations to collapse everything: (1) collapse entire hierarchy and (2) collapse all categories.

So, to summarize, the following would be nice:

1. A collapse-all option that truly collapses everything in the navigation view, including all categories and all groups. I don't know how difficult this would be implement.

2. The ability to set a navigation-view preference to default to a fully-collapsed state. If number 1 is feasible, than this should be as well.

3. The ability to set a navigation-view preference to default to your last collapsed/expanded state (which I understand may not be practical, but I would like to keep on the long wish list).

4. Add "collapse all categories" to the category-tools menu when your navigation-view preference is "By Similar Group and Category."

Sorry for the two lengthy posts, but whenever this topic comes up, users and developers seem to talk past each other. I wanted to be as clear and specific as possible.

RW Project: Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition homebrew world
Other Tools: CampaignCartographer, Cityographer, Dungeonographer, Evernote

Last edited by MNBlockHead; November 18th, 2015 at 10:06 PM. Reason: Fixed types and sloppy writing.
MNBlockHead is offline   #22 Reply With Quote
adzling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 343

Old November 19th, 2015, 07:30 AM
Excellent post MNblockhead.

I know many people here don't think that the interface matters, all that counts is the "feature-set".

However being able to use a product easily and quickly is a core feature IN ITSELF that depends upon a good interface.

Not being able to control the folder states is, imho, very poor interface design (or lack of interface design / thought, take your pick).

It's especially galling considering that all modern software products understand this and implement it almost without exception.

It's become a CONVENTION of interface design that realmworks inexplicably breaks.

I see this throughout Realmworks, features are prioritized over being able to efficiently use them.

At least IMHO and of course YMMV.

This does not mean the developers are lazy or dumb.
It means they are not spending the same cycles on UI as they are on other features.
That's a choice and they are entitled to it of course.
It should be recognized however that it is a choice.
adzling is offline   #23 Reply With Quote
ThatOneMike
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 34

Old November 19th, 2015, 08:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adzling View Post
Excellent post MNblockhead.
It means they are not spending the same cycles on UI as they are on other features.
You don't know how true that is or not. It could be the same cycles, with less apparent result, for any number of reasons.

Seems to me we are doing a good job of putting the feedback out there. That's what a developer needs. I don't know that commentaries on our perception of how they spend their time will raise the flag more than just irritate them.

I hope you take this gentle suggestion in the manner it is intended. I am not remarking on your insistence on a better UI, just the comment I highlighted above.
ThatOneMike is offline   #24 Reply With Quote
kbs666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,690

Old November 19th, 2015, 08:42 AM
As a developer I can tell you that often making any significant change to a UI takes far more time than the average end user would believe.

For instance to do what is called for here, You would need to create a table in the DB to represent every view into each realm with a binary field to represent whether each node is presently expanded or not. Then every time that view is displayed you would need to query the DB to get all that state information and then walk the tree and toggle each node correctly.

Which is all certainly doable but if you'll go look you'll notice complaints about how long it takes to switch topics and views right now. This would make it even slower. So the question becomes is it worth it until there is time to work on performance tuning?

When you're dealing with small software projects sometimes you have to wait for features that other programs have.

This feature is desirable but not nearly as desirable to LWD as the Content Market or the Calendar or, probably, export.
kbs666 is offline   #25 Reply With Quote
Silveras
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,528

Old November 19th, 2015, 11:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbs666 View Post
As a developer I can tell you that often making any significant change to a UI takes far more time than the average end user would believe.

For instance to do what is called for here, You would need to create a table in the DB to represent every view into each realm with a binary field to represent whether each node is presently expanded or not. Then every time that view is displayed you would need to query the DB to get all that state information and then walk the tree and toggle each node correctly.

Which is all certainly doable but if you'll go look you'll notice complaints about how long it takes to switch topics and views right now. This would make it even slower. So the question becomes is it worth it until there is time to work on performance tuning?

When you're dealing with small software projects sometimes you have to wait for features that other programs have.

This feature is desirable but not nearly as desirable to LWD as the Content Market or the Calendar or, probably, export.
In general, I agree... but two minor points...

First, the state of the tree is managed in each tab, not per View. Two tabs accessing items in the same View can have different states for folders in the hierarchy.. including whether or not the hierarchy is even used on that tab.

Second, it is unlikely to be stored in the database as that syncs to the cloud. The existence of a local preferences file, which also tracks the current open topics to display the next time the program is launched, makes it more likely to be where the states are stored. This allows the Player Edition to browse the topic state independently of the GM's settings.

Now, I use a lot of tabs.. 10 or more, commonly, with maps and places and related story elements available to me while I am running my games.

There seems to be a perception that RealmWorks is showing ONE "tree" in the left-side navigation pane, like the Windows Explorer (one navigation pane, and one content pane). This is not the case; each tab in RealmWorks is like one instance of Windows Explorer, with its own hierarchy "tree" (if the user has chosen to use it) and content pane linked together.

I am also a developer.. of Windows UI programs and databases that they work with. I have been the chief architect of solutions for global enterprises sharing data in near-real-time world-wide. All that qualifies me to say is that I have a clue how much I don't know about LoneWolf's design and effort, and how little qualification I have to second-guess them.

As it stands now, I am happy with the tree as-is. I use it fully expanded, usually, only collapsing parts when I find that more convenient. In general, I navigate from the links in the current topic to new ones that I need. Defaulting to "all collapsed" or even more compact than that would annoy me. So that's likely one where LoneWolf can't win.. there are vocal advocates for one, and a silent number of users who don't care or like it as it is... but who might become vocal if it changed. Either way, one default can't please everyone.
Silveras is offline   #26 Reply With Quote
Parody
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 1,515

Old November 19th, 2015, 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adzling View Post
It's especially galling considering that all modern software products understand this and implement it almost without exception.
There's plenty of applications that use tree controls that don't remember or help you. For example, Windows Explorer doesn't follow what you've selected in the main panel unless you've changed a preference.

While I believe RW should offer some options in this area, it's a pretty low priority item.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Silveras View Post
Second, it is unlikely to be stored in the database as that syncs to the cloud. The existence of a local preferences file, which also tracks the current open topics to display the next time the program is launched, makes it more likely to be where the states are stored. This allows the Player Edition to browse the topic state independently of the GM's settings.
The open tabs for a realm are stored in the local database, not in any of the preference files. I expect any related items would be stored there as well. (Since RW ignores those items if you delete the local preferences file it's mostly an implementation detail, but that is where they are stored.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Silveras View Post
So that's likely one where LoneWolf can't win.. there are vocal advocates for one, and a silent number of users who don't care or like it as it is... but who might become vocal if it changed. Either way, one default can't please everyone.
That's why I suggested it be a preference, a year and change ago. :)

I'd still be happy with expanding to the current item and collapsing everything else. Restoring the expanded/collapsed items in the tree would work too (obviously) but is more work.

Parody is offline   #27 Reply With Quote
AEIOU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,147

Old November 19th, 2015, 01:55 PM
I'd really like states to be saved some day. Being able to start with everything like it was last time would be swell. But when I step back and realize it's a feature that most users won't need because they won't have that many categories or that those of us who it would really benefit can achieve in less than a minute of clicking I have to say no comment. It's not a +1 but it's not a -1. It's a solid, good idea but it isn't one that I'm willing to see other things get delayed to implement. But that's just me.

It's super important to bring things to LWD's attention but please don't lose perspective. This may be the most important item to some people. But there are so many other things that could make so much more impact to every single user like reveal-per-character or rescan all links or quick creating prefixes or smartimage pin improvements or spell checking or better storyboard tools or improving performance issues or updating the documentation or auto-synching or or or.... It makes my head spin just thinking of the potential and that's not even 1/100th of the list I'm sure LWD is working their way through.
AEIOU is offline   #28 Reply With Quote
kbs666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,690

Old November 19th, 2015, 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silveras View Post
First, the state of the tree is managed in each tab, not per View. Two tabs accessing items in the same View can have different states for folders in the hierarchy.. including whether or not the hierarchy is even used on that tab.
Never have gotten used to thinking about a tabbed UI. That makes this problem a real nightmare. You need a preference file which gets real complicated real fast.
kbs666 is offline   #29 Reply With Quote
MNBlockHead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Twin Cities Area, MN, USA
Posts: 1,325

Old November 19th, 2015, 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbs666 View Post
This feature is desirable but not nearly as desirable to LWD as the Content Market or the Calendar or, probably, export.
I absolutely understand that and I certainly want the content market, custom calendars, printing, and export first.

The reason for the lengthy post is that in prior communications regarding the need for "collapse all", the response seems to have been "we already have that". I understand the remembering the expansion/collapse state may be difficult or lead to an undesirable impact on performance.

I would hope that a true collapse-all would not be as difficult to implement. They already have the functionality in pieces: collapse entire hierarchy, attach all categories, and attach all groups. Would it be difficult to have a button/hotkey that did all three of those things at one time? Maybe it is. I wouldn't know, just saying that is the feature I'm requesting.

An alternative to that would be to assign hot keys to "collapse all groups" and "collapse all categories", then I would be able to use a third-party macro program to achieve the result I need. Or, at least, a way to open the category-tools and group-tools menus. Without a way to navigate the category and groups tools menus with a keyboard, I need to use a mouse macro with isn't ideal because it requires that RW be sized the same as it was when I created the macro and it is also more sluggish than keystroke macros.

I put this all out there not to complain and not to make unrealistic or ignorant demands. But if some of what I discuss in my above posts are not that difficult, it could be one of those little extras they throw into the next release. They've done this in past (the collapse entire hierarchy was one, as what the hotkey to focus the menu on the active topic, styles, etc.). Hopefully, one or more of the requests in this thread are low hanging fruit. For those that are not low-hanging fruit, then yes, there are bigger fish to fry.

RW Project: Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition homebrew world
Other Tools: CampaignCartographer, Cityographer, Dungeonographer, Evernote
MNBlockHead is offline   #30 Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
wolflair.com copyright ©1998-2016 Lone Wolf Development, Inc. View our Privacy Policy here.