agreed, current situation is confusing and prone to bugs. first drawback of proposed solution: advanced fields were a bit more user friendly (user interface> no formula), and data defined settings are hidden one step deeper in dialogs. I also remember how trainees reacted last week when I explained data defined properties: lost..
If we do that, we need to find a more readable interface interface for data defined properties. It is unclear to the user if some options are activated in there or not. A visual flag could do the trick, or a complete gui review, to avoid another subdialog. (hierarchical view is the current ergonomy option, and I like it). I'm really wondering if the right solution could not be an assistant asking for min size, proportional rules to apply( linear, square tail, improved square tail (exp 0.57) .. ) and showing and generating a legend preview based on a data sample. Assistant will then fill the right expression in data defined expression, and tell the user where to find it. I have been sharing thoose thoughts with Martin Dobias who has legend refactoring in his roadmap. Martin, any opinion? Cheers Régis -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Duplication-of-functionality-Data-defined-size-and-Size-scale-field-tp5131007p5131055.html Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
