> Or should you be required to open the sub-map > and explicitly acknowledge devices? I would say Yes to this. That way you can't "accidentally" ack devices.
> "Open sub-map". Would that be useful? Yes. But only if there was some way to hide the map so that it is still open and monitoring. A double click might be nicer though. > - Should the menu hierarchy be multi-level? Yes. For example: We monitor Residence Halls. These are connected to our core chassis and then to our firewall. We have a top level map that has the firewall attached devices. It would be nice to monitor the residence hall map from there. And then in that map have map monitors that monitor the individual devices in the residence hall. That is 3 layers. Keeps the maps smaller. > - Should the mid-level sub-maps be listed at the top of the Windows menu > (because they have sub-maps)? It would be nice (IMHO) if the "windows" menu had multi layers. The mid levels would display under their parent. Not at the top. > - Would sub-maps ever be shared between higher level maps? (If so, that rules > out a simple "go to parent map" command.) Depends. I don't think we'd use it here, but others might. I think it would be nicer to have the "go to parent map" more than the option to do this. > Would a sub-map ever have a parent map as a sub-map? While redundant network loops are good, I can't see the use for this in maps? > 4) How useful would it be to have a "site map" of the map hierarchy? That would be a nice thing. If we were able to hide it when we didn't need it. > most serious condition on the sub-map". What should we call that thing? Worst case icon? > 6) What other things could we do to make sub-maps more valuable? I think you're on the right track here. If we can hide (not minimize) the maps that would help. And having the easy way to open them from another map. Thanks guys! On 03/11/2003 9:46, "Richard E. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Folks: > > Thanks to Matt Stevens and Steve Campbell for their comments on sub-maps. > These > are great questions, and we left them open because we didn't have clear > answers > when we rolled out version 4.0. Let me rephrase them, and open the list to > discussion. > > 1) Currently, a top-level icon blinks red whenever there are down or > acknowledged devices on its sub-map. > > Questions: > - Matt and Steve suggested that a top-level icon should be blue if everything > on its sub-map has been acknowledged. Do you agree? Is there some other > representation that would be better? > - Should InterMapper allow you to acknowledge everything on a sub-map by > acknowledging the top-level icon? Or should you be required to open the > sub-map > and explicitly acknowledge devices? > > 2) What if, in the traditional InterMapper (Classic/MacOS X with GUI), you > could > command- or control-click to get a contextual menu that would "Open sub-map". > Would that be useful? > > 3) Hierarchy of maps. This gets tricky, especially when people make lots of > maps. Here's a suggestion that allows for a hierarchical menu of maps: > > InterMapper's Windows menu should show all the maps, but list all the maps > that > contain sub-maps at the top, with a ">" for a submenu, and the "leaf maps" at > the bottom. So far, so good. > > Questions: > - Should the menu hierarchy be multi-level? That is, if a top-level map had > sub-maps that each had their own sub-maps, should the menu hierarchy cascade? > - Should the mid-level sub-maps be listed at the top of the Windows menu > (because they have sub-maps)? > - Would sub-maps ever be shared between higher level maps? (If so, that rules > out a simple "go to parent map" command.) > - Would a sub-map ever have a parent map as a sub-map? Is it ever useful to > make a loop, where MapA watches MapB which watches MapC, which itself watches > MapA? (And Bill, Tex, and Christopher: does anything bad happen if someone > does > this? :-) > > 4) How useful would it be to have a "site map" of the map hierarchy? (After > all, > we have a tool that's pretty good at drawing interconnections between items > :-) > > 5) We need a concise name for "the icon on the top-level map that represents > the > most serious condition on the sub-map". What should we call that thing? > > 6) What other things could we do to make sub-maps more valuable? > > Rich Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Dartware, LLC http://www.dartware.com > 10 Buck Road, PO Box 130 Telephone: 603-643-2268 > Hanover, NH 03755-0130 USA Fax: 603-643-2289 > > ____________________________________________________________________ > List archives: > http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/ > To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Allyn Crowe Network Engineering Information and Communications Technology Division Eastern Michigan University 104 Pray-Harrold, Ypsilanti, MI 48197 V: 734.487.2374 "Halo 2 is a lot like Halo 1, only it's Halo 1 on fire, going 130 miles per hour through a hospital zone, being chased by helicopters and ninjas," explained Jason Jones, Bungie Studios head. "And the ninjas are all on fire, too." ____________________________________________________________________ List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/ To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
