On Dec 21, 2007 10:47 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that the current setup is probably optimal; for those who wish
> to view their papers, the Preview pane can be set to "linked
> file" (perhaps there should be a way of selecting which linked file is
> displayed?), while the existing thumbnails should be good enough to
> identify which of several items is the one that you want to look at.
>
> Another option would be to just have an optional setting to put the
> bottom pane on the right-hand-side for those of us with very wide
> monitors; some people prefer Mail to be in a three-pane side-by-side
> format, this might benefit as well.

This is interesting - I bet almost everyone with a recent mac or LCD
screen has a wide format monitor, so how can we improve the layout for
that case?

Although I like having lots of columns of info in BibDesk, the
vertically stacked master-detail view has always seemed cramped, and
making the window wider doesn't improve it much.

I liked the mockup Adam showed - I do think that the format of
references in papers is easier to read than single line tableview
rows. I don't think we'd want two views of the table selection, though
- the new right-side summary view in his mockup seemed like another
table view to me. However, in some ways, that summary view actually
seems like a better 'main view' than the table view...

If we had a three-column layout, the extra vertical pixels we buy in
the middle column could be spent on a table view with one column but
>1 line(s) of text per item row, something like the right side of
Adam's mockup, which I liked.

Of course, nobody's going to agree on what data goes in that wide
tableview so it'd have to be templated, and that's plenty of work (or
is it?)

-mike

>
> On 2007-12-20, at 10:18 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote:
>
> > Isn't 60-70 characters per line the optimum value for minimal eye
> > strain?  There's a reason for LaTeX's crazy narrow \textwidth.
> >
> > Anyway, I hacked together a sample this evening and posted a
> > screenshot here:
> >
> > http://homepage.mac.com/amaxwell/.cv/amaxwell/Sites/.Public/detail_table.jpg-zip.zip
> >
> > and a partly working demo here:
> >
> > http://homepage.mac.com/amaxwell/.Public/BibDesk.app.zip
> >
> > The content of the table on the right would be determined by a
> > template.  Right now it's just a subset of the current detail view,
> > and it uses the new Leopard gradient because I was curious about it.
> > Anyone think this is worth pursuing?
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Bibdesk-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
>



-- 
Michael McCracken
UCSD CSE PhD Candidate
research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/
misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bibdesk-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users

Reply via email to