Blimey! This is all just to complicated for a dope like me.
Printable View
Blimey! This is all just to complicated for a dope like me.
You already use an inverted mouse pointer for Select Under and a mouse pointer with a circle around it for Select Inside. Why can't you use something like a single vertical arrow (and if PrintScrn would capture it, I'd show you what this looks like in my database app!) to indicate that the next click will be an 'alignment click'?Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilM
To cancel the operation, simply press Esc and the vertical pointer turns back into a standard mouse pointer. Or, if you had the toolbar button remaining depressed when you're in 'alignment click' mode, simply pressing the toolbar button again to return it to an undepressed state would indicate that that would take you back out of 'alignment mode'.
You're right about retaining some kind of dialog box to account for variations on the theme (To distribute selected objects evenly using (a) their top edges or (b) their bottom edges or (c) their centre points or (d) by gap between them.) but these are, generally speaking, rarities. They don't happen often and, speaking for myself, I generally tune this sort of thing by eye anyway.
Again, speaking for myself, most of the time I just want to rapidly "align this lot of objects all by their left-hand edges lined-up over against that thing... there." Or possibly right-hand edges, or top or bottom.
If I can do that in 2 clicks, I'd solve most of my problems.
If I *did* want to distribute the centres of selected objects in an exponentially-growing spacing pattern along a pre-designated curve, I'd *expect* to have to go into a dialog box and be asked a couple or three questions.
But for most (97%?) work, I would literally like to be able to say, "You lot. Line up over there."
Two sentences. Two thoughts. Two clicks.
Oh, and nice to see you here. :)
Here is an idea. Many probably won't like it, but it's just an idea.
The horizontal shift and vertical shift buttons in the following graphic are meant to be 'either, neither, but not both' toggle state buttons. If the user clicks the horizontal shift and then clicks the vertical shift, the horizontal shift button unselects itself. If the user then clicks the vertical shift again, the vertical shift unselects itself, so neither is selected. When the 'vertical' button is selected, the user can click in the box without holding the 'Shift' key down, and the same thing happens as if the shift key was being held down. Same for the Ctrl key and the horizontal button.
The horizontal and vertical positions buttons are similar, in that only one 'horizontal' button may be selected at a time, and only one vertical button may be selected at a time. They work almost exactly like the existing drop-down combo boxes, but are much easier to use, although the icons are first drafts.
I hope it makes sense. As I said, it's just an idea. A purist would note that the bottom buttons make the top 'graphic screen' part unnecessary, as the bottom gives more precise control more easily, but I like the top part for the feedback.
I think it depends a lot on of what type of work you are doing. For designing web pages for example, distribute selected objects evenly using (a) their top edges or (b) their bottom edges or (c) their centre points or (d) by gap between them options are usefull and used regularly.Quote:
Originally Posted by brianlj
He're's my suggestion - it has similarities with the existing dialog, but uses far less screen estate - you can fit it onto a menu bar.
The idea is to get as close to 'one click' alignment or distribution as possible, without filling the window with buttons. With six buttons we can replicate the existing dialog.
Graphically you can see the symbols of horizontal or vertical alignment/distribution. If the alignment isn't what you want you can either cycle through the options by clicking the symbol (toggle version) or pick from the drop down. Then you can choose align or distribute.
If (like me) you often repeat similar tasks, once you choose a particular alignment, you will be left with a single-click operation since the dialog will retain the last choice. If not, you have very little mouse travel (which is a PIA with the current dialog) and very few clicks. Because this version uses very little screen estate, it can be put as a menu panel, or whatever.
What's the opinion on this? We certainly don't need the graphic showing what's going to happen.
Paul
Better still? (BTW I have never, ever aligned anything I haven't selected, so I think the 'within' part of the existing dialog is redundant).
If anyone wants an interesting read, try the book "Why software sucks" - www.whysoftwaresucks.com
Hate is a strong word. I would say I dislike the functionality of a particular tool or dialog within the interface but I don't hate it... much!! ;) I would like to see an option to dock the align dialog. I think most dialogs should included this option.
Personally I would have made it so there was only one or two ways to dock dialogs and that would be to double click or right click on the top border with a small clickable text option that would say "Dock". This way that cuts out all the other auto docking irritations.
Why tie the alignment dialogue into combinations at all?
If it were to have a single alignment at a time and each step happened on screen immediately, instead of the combinations that are first selected then applied, it would be simpler and with fewer mouse-clicks (no need to click on the drop downs or the apply button).
For instance to align all selected to the left and distribute top to bottom;
With the present dialogue that would take no less than seven mouse clicks/keypresses (including opening and closing the dialogue).
Without the combinations it would take four mouse clicks.
Click-open dialogue, click -everything selected aligns to the left, click - selection distributed from top to bottom, click-close dialogue.
And you can see what is happening on screen as you do it.
This would leave 14 align and distribute options (no need for the no change-option) and the three areas options = 17 icons altogether.
Still too big to be on the selector options bar permenantly, but easier to use?
Seriously, why stick with the combinations style dialogue?
I'm not sure if you're referring to the old dialogue, or my suggestion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMyWords
If you're referring to my suggestion - my original suggestion was a button panel offering a one-click solution. It takes up a bit of screen-estate and I'd like it dockable, though others would use it as a floating panel. This suggestion is similar to yours - a panel of buttons.
The other thought is to have a smaller screen footprint that could be adopted on a menu bar and (if required always present). The smaller screen footprint requires a compromise in screen-estate, which means one-click isn't always achievable.
So, it's a question of having a compact option or a larger panel, one-click, or minimal clicks.
Judging from this thread, I appreciate Xaras problem more. Some users like what we have, some don't. If they do nothing, people have the same attitude about this, but changing it risks the displeasure of parts of the user base.
I have certainly been surprised by the support for the existing dialog - how can so many people like such a thing? .. ;-)
Paul