Hi Dirk, hi together, I'm not great in UI myself, but I've drawn out what I tried to put in words. It's basically just moving some elements around, so they are more grouped by functionality.
Basically I moved the constraints down. I aligned the Dropdown from the Fulltext-Section with the "Add constraints"-button, but did not align the items in the constraint-list with anything outside of the list (so keep the list tabular, but don't align with the headers). I did remove the bold "Filter" at the top left, since I think the Tab header should be enough (but if a title should be present, maybe give it it's own line?). I would also suggest that - if no constraint is currently active - a "No constrains present"-Text should be displayed where the constraints are otherwise. Best regards Christof On 09.01.21 18:01, Dirk Hohndel via subsurface wrote: > On Jan 8, 2021, at 15:13, Berthold Stoeger via subsurface > <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Freitag, 8. Jänner 2021 23:25:07 CET Christof Arnosti via subsurface >>> wrote: >>> * When I select date(yearly) as base variable and buddies as data, bar >>> charts have a yellow warning in the drop down. Why's that? >> A bar-chart is not recommended with continuous data. A histogram is >> preferred. >> However, as you note, the warning icon is not a good UI element. > BTW: since Berthold, Willem, and I are all three not necessarily the best UI > designers in the world... I’m curious if people have better idea for how to > mark “undesirable” charts. What Berthold has done with the warning triangle > has the advantage of being fairly easy to implement in Qt (because the widget > supports this concept of having a mark that you put on top of the icon and in > front of the text). But if someone has a stronger UI concept of how we should > do that, I’m sure one of us will try to wrestle Qt into submission to > implement that. > >>> * The trend line does not always appear in the scatter graph. For >>> example, when I select date (no binning) / depth, there is no trend >>> line, except for when I filter out very shallow depths. For water >>> temp over date I get a trend line right away. I'm sure that's >>> correct and there is a statistical reason for this that I'm not >>> aware of. >> Indeed, there is a statistical test whether there is a linear regression. >> Willem knows more. > And, BTW, depending on which version exactly you tested, there were a couple > of binaries that had a bug that prevented valid regression lines from being > shown. The current binaries, however, no longer have that bug. > >>> * Is there some Export functionality planned? For example simple image >>> export of the graph? >> Not yet. > I’ll admit that I always think “every OS has a well understood screen shot > function...” > So this isn’t necessarily high on my personal list :-) > >>> * For me the Filter GUI seems a bit unintuitive. When there is no >>> constraint present, it's not very obvious that constraints can be >>> added (the button is in an odd place). A change to make it more >>> obvious could be to add a "Constraints" heading below the fulltext >>> search, and move the button there? And maybe also display a "No >>> constraints" text when no constraint is set? I really like the >>> "Filter sets" functionality! >> Yes, I also noticed that - especially in the German translation - the filter >> is quite inaccessible. > See my earlier comment. We would be delighted to see visual mockups of what > you think would be a better UI. Literally, take a few colored pens/pencils, > draw on a piece of paper, send a cell phone pic. No need to try to create > this in software, just help us with better ideas... > >>> * What I didn't find was an "Average depth" variable, this would maybe >>> also be interesting to add. >> I'm not sure if we currently track the average depth. I'm also not sure it >> is >> very well defined - what about surface intervals. Dirk? > When people say “average depth” I always assume they are asking for the “mean > depth”. > I’m not sure what I would do with a surface interval statistic - but hey, > what do I know, right? > >>> What would be really nice, but might be complicated to implement, would >>> be to have a kind of "Zoom" or "Select" possibility to add constraints. >>> For example my Depth over Date Scattergraph looks like this: >>> >>> Now to have a look at a single holiday I can add a constraint over a >>> range of dates, for example 1.1.2017 to 1.1.2018. This works fine! But >>> the cherry on top would be if I could simply drag a rectangle over the >>> points in 2017, and set the constraints like this (Sort of a "Zoom into >>> range" functionality). >> That is an interesting idea. But don't hold your breath. Currently we are >> changing the rendering engine to port the statistics to mobile and this will >> take some time. > I have learned the hard way that these “intuitive zoom” ideas end up being > painfully hard to implement, but I agree that on the desktop (with a mouse) > this does sound super cool. > > > /D > > _______________________________________________ > subsurface mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
