On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 13:56 +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 20:22 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> > On 03/05/2010 03:20 AM, Luiz Felipe Moraes Pereira wrote:
> > > Hi again, the original discussion is in the link below:
> > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611758
> > >
> > > I was advised to present this idea here, what do you think?
> > >
> > > Also I do not mind much about not having a selected layer after
> > > the deletion of a layer. But the forced viewer scroll down( or up ),
> > > depending of the last selected layer is a problem.
> > 
> > To me, having the layers dialog scroll to a seemingly random place after 
> > deleting a layer is a clear usability problem. A user should not have to 
> > worry about what layer that was previously selected when deleting a layer.
> 
> Perhaps the problem is just the scrolling then. GIMP could continue to
> select the previously selected layer, but it wouldn't have to scroll
> that layer into sight. It could instead just leave the list-view as it
> is.

Nope, the problem here is that we are using a mechanism that is
actually meant for selecting a layer once you deleted the last
channel. The MRU list of layers doesn't really make sense to use
when we are dealing with layers only, since the obviously expected
behavior when deleting a list/tree element is to select a
neighboring element. Everybody please calm down, I plan to
change things here anyway, the refactoring of the image's item
trees is not over yet.

stay tuned,
--mitch


_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to