I retract my comments completely until I get a chance to think it all through
again...
Tom
-
Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon
--
View this message in context:
On 11/16/2016 02:44 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
>> Another scenario would be:
>>
>> When clicking, the group toggle between unchecked, partially checked,
>> checked. At the same time it caches the state for all subitems to
>> restore the partially checked state when switching to this.
>>
>> At any
Le mercredi 16 novembre 2016 15:12:27, Tom Chadwin a écrit :
> > You click on G ==> it becomes partially checked, and you restore
>
> StatePartial
> (ie A is unchecked and B is checked)
>
> [and earlier posts]
>
> I don't think I agree with this. I'll try to express how I would expect it
> to
+1 would be a wonderful improvements, I agree with the three state
implementation.
Luigi Pirelli
**
* Boundless QGIS Support/Development: lpirelli AT boundlessgeo DOT com
* LinkedIn:
> You click on G ==> it becomes partially checked, and you restore
StatePartial
(ie A is unchecked and B is checked)
[and earlier posts]
I don't think I agree with this. I'll try to express how I would expect it
to work:
- the check state of a group is determined entirely by the check state
Hi all,
Jumping in... Quite reluctant at first, I think it's indeed a very nice
improvement.
Matthias' idea is quite nice and turns off my concerns.
I would prefer first approach (switching brtween partial and checked or
unchecked) as I find it more intuitive and also more practical: one
click
> Another scenario would be:
>
> When clicking, the group toggle between unchecked, partially checked,
> checked. At the same time it caches the state for all subitems to
> restore the partially checked state when switching to this.
>
> At any time, when a subitems check state is changed, all
On 11/16/2016 01:54 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
>> The visualisation could still be tri-state, I think
>>
>> * Unchecked
>> * Checked (All subitems checked)
>> * Semi-checked (Checked but some sub-items are invisible)
>>
>> Clicking would then switch between either Unchecked and Semi-Checked or
>>
> The visualisation could still be tri-state, I think
>
> * Unchecked
> * Checked (All subitems checked)
> * Semi-checked (Checked but some sub-items are invisible)
>
> Clicking would then switch between either Unchecked and Semi-Checked or
> Unchecked and Checked depending on the subitems.
>
On 15 November 2016 at 20:34, Even Rouault wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been involved in discussions about improving/changing how visibility of
> layers (or groups) is handled when they are inside groups. Currently if you
> check/uncheck a group, this recursively
Hi,
2016-11-15 11:38 GMT+01:00 Nathan Woodrow :
> Hey Even,
>
> Personally I think this is a good change and handy for the use case you
> mentioned.
>
> To solve the UX of knowing if the layer is visible in a heavy nested list
> I think we could grey out, or some kind of
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Even Rouault
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been involved in discussions about improving/changing how visibility
> of
> layers (or groups) is handled when they are inside groups. Currently if you
> check/uncheck a group, this recursively
Hey Even,
Personally I think this is a good change and handy for the use case you
mentioned.
To solve the UX of knowing if the layer is visible in a heavy nested list I
think we could grey out, or some kind of icon, for all layers not currently
on.
Nathan
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 8:32 pm Even
Hi,
I've been involved in discussions about improving/changing how visibility of
layers (or groups) is handled when they are inside groups. Currently if you
check/uncheck a group, this recursively checks/unchecks all its items (layers
or sub-groups). There are workflows with large projects
14 matches
Mail list logo