Re: Re: Find bookmarks comments

On 2003-08-25 19:50 +0200, Ricardo Fern?ndez Pascual <[email protected]> wrote:
> El lun, 25-08-2003 a las 18:00, Tommi Komulainen escribió:
> 
> Ok. Let's assume that we want to include all bookmarks in the search.
> What about hiding the left pane when a search starts? It is useless
> anyway when searching and that way there would not be any inconsistency
> in the screen[1]. 
> 
> I would be happy with that solution.
> 
> [1] The inconsistency that I'm talking about is that the right pane
> could have bookmarks which are not children (nor descendants) of the
> bookmark selected in the left pane.

I think that would be a bad idea.  It's one thing to (slightly) alter
the contents of the treeview, but it's a whole other thing to completely
hide the other treeview.  It would be forcing an extra step to get it
back again, either from the menu ("Why did that thing got unselected?")
or by clearing the search entry ("Huh?!")

IMHO, the inconsistency can be easily avoided by unselecting everything
from the folder pane when the search starts.  When you click on a folder
again, just forget/clear the search and show the folder contents as
usual again.


> > That's the question, really, and I don't think I have an answer.  It
> > might help if there was more of the title shown.  The URL part of the
> > autocompletion list could also stop showing the common prefix, it's just
> > wasting space.  Instead show more of the part that differs.
> 
> That's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure if it would look right in
> practice. Maybe justifying the URL to the left instead of to the right?
> I don't know if this would be possible without writing a custom
> cellrenderer.

I don't really have a clue, either..


> I use it a lot now, instead of tab completion. Actually, I miss it when
> using bash.

bash? pfft.. zsh! :-P


> > > <offtopic>
> > > BTW: I plan to add an UI to make more easy to add a bookmark to several
> > > categories, like in Epiphany. That's what aliases are for.
> > > </offtopic>
> > 
> > Indeed.  I'm thinking you don't even need to mention aliases explicitly
> > in the UI.  When copying bookmarks, make them aliases instead.  
> 
> No, that would be very confusing: Imagine that I have a bookmark and I
> want to create another one very similar to it. I would copy it and
> modify the copy. If we make an alias directly you could not do this.

I think it depends how you want to present aliases.  I think they'd be
more useful if they were created implicitly.  The base assumption being
that more often than not, when you copy a bookmark you want that same
bookmark available also from a different folder.  But then you don't
really want a copy, rather a link or an alias.

Still based on the previous assumption, you don't copy a bookmark to use
it as a template as often.  Thus the extra step below wouldn't be much
of a problem.


> > When modifying a bookmark with
> > aliases, ask if the changes affect this instance only, or all of them
> > (compare to recurring events in Palm Pilot/Evolution.)
> 
> I need to think about this. I don't think it is needed if you don't
> remove the ability to copy bookmarks.

I think this also depends on how you want to present aliases.


-- 
Tommi Komulainen                                 [email protected]
GPG 1024D/68388EE6    6FD6 DD79 EB38 BF6F 3533  09C0 04A8 9871 6838 8EE6

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/S7kYBKiYcWg4juYRAtiKAJ4rbu30+tDl5AJZySFBuoUZUMzapACdEbZz
quLD4U0mDCt2l894GOod4W8=
=fhad
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----