On 10/25/2016 12:14 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
I think the right approach to fix this is to use categories, like we
have in layouts (the interface is already implemented also for
modules). This would make it easier to find the module you are looking
for (without knowing the exact name, which is sometimes quite
arbitrary: did you know that there is a further theorem module sorted
under "N"?). This would probably also save horizontal space.
So instead of:
...
Named Theorems
...
Theorems
Theorems (AMS)
Theorems (AMS, Numbered by Type)
Theorems (AMS-Extended)
Theorems (AMS-Extended, Numbered by Type)
Theorems (Numbered by Chapter)
Theorems (Numbered by Type)
Theorems (Numbered by Type within Chapters)
Theorems (Numbered by Section)
Theorems (Unnumbered)
...
We would display:
...
Theorems
|- AMS
|- AMS, num. by Type
|- AMS, extended
|- AMS, extended, num. by Type
|- Standard
|- Named
|- Num. by Chapter
|- Num. by Type
|- Num. by Type within Chapters
|- Num. by Section
|- Unnumbered
...
A filter bar to filter for categories and names (plus probably
descriptions and/or keywords) would further increase usability.
Jürgen
I have no objection to categories, but I suspect we will end up either
with a large number of categories containing one or two modules or a
single large "miscellaneous" category.
With or without categories, I would definitely vote for the filter bar,
and I think it should include descriptions. With the filter bar, Andrew
could type in "Assumption" and find all variations of the theorems
module containing assumptions.
Paul
