2013/10/12 Cédric Krier <[email protected]>: > On 12/10/13 17:12 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: >> Just added a new blueprint [1] for adding support for field actions >> specially intended for allowing drill-down functionality in Function >> fields. >> >> Comments are welcomed. > > I'm not very fan of it for those reasons: > > - They would be most of the time duplicate with relate on the > record. In your example about "Receivable" and "Payable", there is > already a relate on Party for this.
The proposal tries to reduce the number of relate buttons and put them near the aggregated data. I think the current design is good until you have a large number of relate actions. I also think it is more intuitive because you have a number and you want to dig into where that information comes from. > - User will not know when there is such options or not, except if > a flag is added to the view but there are already too much stuff > on them. In current approach you don't know if you have the link either. The green arrow may be enabled but you don't know if you'll be able to dig into the information you want and then you have to search for it in the list. I think some kind of visual sign should be added. > - For cases where relate is not possible, there is still the > possibility to do it with a button. Agreed, although buttons will probably make the interface more cluttered than another (smaller) symbol added in the field. > - Keyword are for actions and all actions work at record level so it > is strange to try to make them working at field level. Moreover, > your proposal works at record level and not at field level, you > just move the place where they are diplayed. Yes, they're just moved for the reasons above. PS: I brought the discussion to tryton@ because it affects mainly the user interface for all users. -- Albert Cervera i Areny Consultor funcional Tel. 93 553 18 03 @albertnan www.NaN-tic.com Avís legal >>
