+ 1 for not having an unchecked layer non visible, even if the group is not checked -> this will confuse users For radio-like interaction, I think it would be nice inside a group. If you want to use it for layers outside a group or for group, we should really find a way to make the "radio" items visible (background color for selected layers or groups with radio behaviour ?). It would indeed be great to let the user choose 2 to n layers (or groups) , right-click and set "radio button behaviour" or "exclusive visibility".
2013/10/11 Duarte Carreira <[email protected]> > An unchecked layer is never visible... that would really confuse users... > > -----Mensagem original----- > De: Bernhard Ströbl [mailto:[email protected]] > Enviada: sexta-feira, 11 de Outubro de 2013 11:25 > Para: [email protected] > Assunto: Re: [Qgis-developer] Reliable way to determine a groupIndex in > the legend tree > > this was the original proposal: > > Am 11.10.2013 11:22, schrieb Sandro Santilli: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 09:13:03AM +0000, Duarte Carreira wrote: > >> The group checkbox, imho, should *not always* switch children on/off. > You should have a modifier to get this as a secondary behavior, like > pressing the ctrl key when (un)checking the group checkbox. The primary > behavior of the group switch should be to make the children invisible or > visible, regardless of the children's visibility being on or off. > > I understand this in the way I wrote in my last message. You would make > the children visible/unvisible "regardless of the children's visibility > being on or off". This results in the two cases I described. > Well, to be honest there are two more cases, but they are not critical :-) > 3) group is checked and layer ist checked > 4) group is unchecked and layer is uncheched > > >> > >> In the primary behavior when the parent is turned OFF, the children > are not drawn but retain their checked or uncheck status. > >> If you use the secondary behavior then unchecking the parent will > uncheck the children. Same would apply when checking the parent on. > > > > Agreed, sounds like a sensible behavior to me. > > Am 11.10.2013 12:09, schrieb Sandro Santilli: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:02:08PM +0200, Bernhard Ströbl wrote: > > > >> We would have these two cases: > >> 1) Group is checked and although layer is unchecked it is visible > > > > I don't think this case exists. > > Why not? You check/uncheck a group and the layers are visible/invisible > depending on the group status not their individual status. > > > Are you saying you _want_ this to be possible ? > > Because for me an unchecked layer should _never_ be shown. > > Same for me, _plus_ a checked layer should _always_ be shown > > > >> 2) Group is unchecked and although layer is checked it is not visible > > > > This is a possible case, IMHO, which calls for the "half-checked" widget. > > > > --strk; > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus > > signature database 8904 (20131011) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET Mail Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature > database 8904 (20131011) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Mail Security. > http://www.eset.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
