Lone Wolf Development Forums  

Go Back   Lone Wolf Development Forums > Realm Works Forums > Realm Works Feature Requests


Thread Tools Display Modes
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,005

Old May 15th, 2014, 06:24 AM
Originally Posted by Bidmaron View Post
Folks, I gave them an easily workable solution in my previous post that does exactly what we want. We shouldn't settle for a half-assed solution. It is easy. You compute a field that is the concatenation of the label and the content and this is what is visible in view mode. In edit mode you hide that computed field and show the separate label and text fields. The only issue is that the display code would have to set like a word paragraph indent to start the first line past where the label ends. The code would have to redetermine the indent amount any time the dynamically-sized label is edited. The z order of the label would be maintained on top of the content field. This is not that hard to do. Don't settle for something less.
Your proposed solution fails to handle a number of nasty complexities that you're probably not considering. Those issues turn your "easy" solution into a decidedly more complicated task.

So here's a critical question to consider...

Would you rather have us do it sooner using a simpler solution that we can implement relatively quickly? Or do it your way and likely have it take months longer before it actually gets implemented because there are numerous other features of significantly higher priority?

Tasks that take less than a day can be slotted in between "big tasks", allowing us to get some of them done on a steady basis. Tasks that take multiple days get prioritized along with all other meaty tasks, which means they don't get tackled for a much longer time unless they are high priority.

If you take the attitude of "don't settle for less", then you're effectively saying you're happy to wait a potentially long time for a feature, as it has to be weighed and prioritized against everything else. That's just the reality of the situation, since there are hundreds of things on our todo list, all of which are screaming for attention, and we can only do a few at a time.

Please keep this reality in mind when making requests.

Also, given all the complexities inherent to Realm Works, declaring something as "easy" without a thorough analysis of the actual technical implications is "bad form" on so many levels - not to mention that it's utterly misleading to others. You may have an idea of how it MIGHT be easy to do, but that doesn't mean it IS easy until you've actually considered all the technical implications. As a techie yourself, I'm sure you've encountered such situations numerous times, and I'm disappointed you allowed yourself to fall into that trap here.

Offering suggestions is GREAT, but please don't make assumptions about what is or isn't easy from a technical standpoint with Realm Works. I'm sure you'd be quite surprised at some of the things that seem easy and are actually hard, as well as some of the things that seem hard and are actually easy.

rob is offline   #21 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 1,342

Old May 15th, 2014, 01:46 PM
Put 1 and 2 together by adding a "Multi-line" checkbox to the "Labeled Text" snippet definition. When unchecked you get the Tags snippet without a Tag entry box, checked you get the indented multiple line edit control. Let us decide how much much text we tend to enter for a particular snippet type. :)

Parody is offline   #22 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 468

Old May 15th, 2014, 06:34 PM
Rob, I don't want to get in a coding urination contest, and maybe the engine you are using is primitive enough that it doesn't support a 'LostFocus' type of event and maybe you can't interrogate a screen control that is set as auto-resize and you can't use an rtf type control where you can set the first line indent of the rtf control to the width (plus a comfortable offset) of the control that lost the focus (the label). I apologize for assuming your development environment was at least as capable as visual basic for applications, which can do all these things.

As to whether I'd wait, well, I might be alone on that, but yes, I'd wait for an effective solution rather than a half-assed one. What you have is a wonderful, friggin' outstanding product. It works as is pretty dang well. Solutions 1 and 2 are barely better than the existing workaround IMO.

Sorry for assuming your development tool is evidently less capable than I had imagined. This is not completely trivial in VBA, but it is hardly a full day's worth of coding (probably not an hour's worth).

Again, Rob. You guys have done a fabulous job, please don't consider that I'm not appreciative of the major magic you folks have worked. But this is a feature request list, and I don't think I'm out of the box expecting a feature like what we're requesting.
Bidmaron is offline   #23 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 468

Old May 15th, 2014, 06:49 PM
I request everyone to please disregard what I intended to be a constructive suggestion on how to implement what folks are requesting. Rob is right (of course). This is probably ten times harder than I'm giving it credit for.

I've been involved in projects before, and it is my fear that if we settle for a short-term, incomplete (which I have inappropriately deemed half-assed), then we will not get the full, workable solution (after all, we'd have something a little better than the original, why spend more effort on polishing that cannon ball?).

Anyway, I apologize to all concerned, not the least of which is Rob and his development team, who have done one heck of a great job. I really did mean it in a constructive way, but ... enough said I suppose.
Bidmaron is offline   #24 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,005

Old May 15th, 2014, 08:00 PM
@Bidmaron: The problem is that you are not considering a whole bunch of factors that you're simply unaware of under the covers. The framework we're using is quite capable. However, we've also had to seriously customize it in ways it was never designed for in order to do some of the stuff we've done. That makes certain things that are normally simple actually quite hard, and it also makes various normally hard things quite simple.

Your assumptions are based on the premise that we've not done any of the serious customization work. That's the crux of the problem. Everyone's lack of insight into those details makes it impossible for them to know the implications for any given feature request - yourself included.

We're listening to all the suggestions and have been working to tackle of few them already. But please don't make assumptions about what is and isn't easy, since the rules are completely different from normal due to the ways we've customized things to create Realm Works. That's what I'm asking.

And it definitely is hurtful to make statements like your "constructive" one above wherein you've gone out of your way to belittle the "engine" underneath it all with multiple aspersions. Even with the "please disregard" post following it, the message above is still "you guys must be stupid to have chosen such a primitive framework". That is definitely NOT the case.

So my request stands: Please don't assume things for which you lack the appropriate information upon which to make a valid judgement.

rob is offline   #25 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 468

Old May 15th, 2014, 08:17 PM
As I said, please forgive me, Rob. Thanks for your clarification.
Bidmaron is offline   #26 Reply With Quote
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3

Old September 10th, 2014, 07:45 PM
I really hate to jump into the thread at this point, seeing as the topic's four months old and left off with an argument, but as a new user to Realm Works, I was both surprised and discouraged to find out text snippets couldn't include labels. I understand there are UI complexities, and I'm not downplaying those. I just think the application would benefit from this feature.

Rob, Option #2 sounds fine to me. As a user, I am comfortable with the tradeoff in UI real estate if I decide I want an obscenely large multi-line text snippet. As long as I can choose between a labeled text snippet and an unlabeled one I'll be perfectly happy. Under the vast majority of circumstances, I'd only choose the labeled one if I knew my content was just going to be a one-liner. If I'm going to write paragraphs, that's almost always going to go into a separate section with an unlabeled text snippet.
LordOfAnnora is offline   #27 Reply With Quote
Dark Lord Galen
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 698

Old September 14th, 2014, 09:17 AM
@Lord of Annora (great SN by the way)

Don't be afraid to dive in ...

While Rob barks often (wink) he seldom bites (though have been bitten once or twice now that I think on it hehehe)

.....but don't let that deter you, he is just very passionate about producing not a good product, but a great one.... I think that is where he and Bidmaron stepped off badly (IMHO).

Rob's natural reaction is to defend his product, his team and who in his place would do it any differently? I'd much rather have a few "heated debates" than a company (and the owner in this case) not communicating at all with the consumer.

As to your feedback
There is always compromise.. Rob is offering a short term solution within the timing his limited resources allows, he isn't telling Bidmaron no, he is simply saying your proposal oversimplifies the challenge (understandable since in all likelihood Bidmaron doesn't have access to the intricacies of the core coding).

It might be likely in the future, after other more pressing challenges are met and in the "rear view mirror" that a more robust and fuller featured method may come to light. (all ways the case on any software)

And Bidmaron may certainly be the spark that led to the light..... but even light takes time to travel.....

And now back to your regularly broadcast thread

Dark Lord Galen is offline   #28 Reply With Quote
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 33

Old September 30th, 2014, 09:28 PM
Hi all. I'm jumping in. labeling text snips is a +1 for me. For example I was creating a topic template for D&D 5th monster. I want data for each item in it's own place. I can easily make a tag list for Race. However, Hit Points are NOT made for a tag list.

A temporary fix could be adding the feature "Label" that would go above ANY snip and give us some ability to choose text format/alignment? This would do it for me. It takes up more space but it would be a much simpler way to get this done. We're adding the title above. A divider with text.

Sub-sections could work here but there is no formatting/text control and you would need a way to OMIT the TEXT snippet that is automatically created with a section. For instance, in category management you could put a check box that allows you to omit the added text snip IF you have entered your own snippet. (I would really like to see this feature)

Just some thoughts. RW rocks.

gamemasterbob is offline   #29 Reply With Quote
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 1,342

Old September 30th, 2014, 10:50 PM
Don't forget that there are Numeric snippets, which have proper titles.

It is annoying that sections with no text snippet (regardless of other snippets) get assigned a text snippet. A related request thread: Sections without snippets.

Parody is offline   #30 Reply With Quote

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 05:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
wolflair.com copyright ©1998-2016 Lone Wolf Development, Inc. View our Privacy Policy here.