Recently, I posted about the annoying (IMO) "color boxes" in the category list, and suggested a sort by color ability when viewing category lists.
>From a reply to that message, it was evident that I wasn't clear about which color box I thought was annoying, as the category window has two. I meant the color box on the left, not the pop-up color selector. I find the left color patch annoying because it does not reflect the actual color chosen, but a generic color "in that range". If you look at the two color swatches, the one on the left does not match the one on the right if you've set a custom color using Other... in the selector. It seems to use one of the predefined color values that is closest to the color chosen. (I have an iMac, set to 1024x768 at 75 mHz, millions of colors. Other applications display color variations just fine.) I have, for example, 4 categories color-defined in varying shades of "orange". They are all differing RGB/HEX values, from the 216 color HTML palette. The text name of the category takes the color just fine, as do message and other items assigned that category, but the left-side "color box" is the same for each (as well as for any category set to E's built-in 'brown' color). The right side color pop-up is appropriately different. The left-side box is a visual distraction and an completely useless item in this regard. It is a) redundant as a window item even if it did work (then you'd have one on the left and one on the right) and b) an inaccurate representation of the actual color. Further, if I choose "Brown" from the named colors in the popup list, the left-side color cube is the same "orange" as the above 4 categories. Perplexing. Secondly, I disagree with the reply that sorting by color is a) impossible and b) ridiculous. Sorting by color is completely legitimate and absolutely logical, and for more than just "graphic artists", as was suggested. In my usage, closely related categories are similarly colored. Listing by name of the category is less (or not at all) useful than being able to see _related_ categories. But sorting alphabetically ascending or descending is the only option for viewing the list of categories. If you could click the column head in the category window and sort the list that way, then -- if you were the type who used categories with related/similar colors -- you could see those at once. And yes, sorting by RGB value is completely possible and the logical method (not color "name", of course). And whether or not there are 17 trillion (or whatever number was specifically mentioned...something on the order of 10^14 as I recall) is completely moot. That's an impossible/impractical number of categories. The idea of sorting by color is not new. Look at any CLUT table and you will find a variety of methods, from VisiBone and others, who have the daunting task of arranging by hue or luminosity or other criteria in two dimensional space (thereby producing a wealth of alternate color selection palettes for Mac applications). But in this case, we are talking linear top-to-bottom color organization. It is no problem to sort colors, including the childhood "Roy G. Biv" pneumonic. There is a starting point if ever there was one. So, yes, I think that there should be, and that is easy to implement, a useful means of sorting items by color. If you're going to add "visual color" as an indicator for the user, then there should be a means of sorting things by that indicator. I hope that helps clarify my earlier comments about color sorting. Gary -- Do not reply via email. Incoming replies are auto-deleted. Please post directly to the list or newsgroup. Thank you! Really need direct? Rot me at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lbhe fhowrpg zhfg ortva "abgwhax:" (ab dhbgrf) Avpr gb zrrg lbh! Qba'g fcnz zr. -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
