[Fwd: Re: New root category creation advice]

Oops, I didn't notice I replied originally only to Mr. Gerla. Sorry. :(

-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Mike Sassak <msassak sent com>
To: Tim Gerla <tim gerla net>
Subject: Re: New root category creation advice
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:39:12 -0500

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 11:43, Tim Gerla wrote:
> Edd Dumbill wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 21:33 -0500, Mike Sassak wrote:
> > 
> >>I recently downloaded the f-spot source from cvs and really like what I
> >>see so far. One problem I ran into pretty early though is that there is
> >>no way to create a new root category along the lines of the default
> >>"People", "Places" etc. So I began looking at the code, and have changed
> >>TagCommands.cs somewhat to allow the user to select a "Root" category in
> >>the "Create New Category" dialog box. The other categories are then
> >>indented two spaces for each level as usual. The only problem I have
> >>with this, is that I don't really like the dropdown like that; it seems
> >>too complex, and clashes with the lack of a visible "Root" tag in the
> >>left-hand pane. So am I just being neurotic, or would a "New Category in
> >>Root" checkbox (or something to that effect) be more appropriate? 
> > 
> > 
> > Why don't we just figure out the obvious ones that people might want and
> > leave it at that, rather than complicating things?
> > 
> > At any rate it might be nice the original ones can't be deleted. e.g.
> > you could tie special linking into the addressbook if you knew People
> > and Places always existed, etc.
> > 
> > Just quick random thoughts; but I think you need to say why we need new
> > root categories?
> > 
> > -- Edd
> >
> I think that the ability to add new root categories is an important 
> feature. I can see myself getting very annoyed trying to figure out 
> where to put "Pets", for example. I'm sure others will have similar 
> problems. Surely some people's specialized (or even not-so-specialized) 
> photo collections will need categories other than the four defaults.
> I wonder if the dropdown list isn't the right widget to pick the parent 
> category...
> Also, can someone explain to me the difference between Tag and Category? 
> Upon quick inspection of the app I can't figure out the difference. I 
> haven't played with Album too much, though--maybe it makes more sense there.
> I briefly thought that maybe categories should ALL be at the root level, 
> with all tags underneath those categories, and other tags.
> Tim Gerla

Edd: I think not being able to delete the original ones may be a good
idea, though I'm on the fence on that one. Perhaps being able to read
them from G-Conf, so an advanced user could delete them? (Just tossing
out ideas here, though). But I really do not like the idea of not being
able to *add* them. I had been using F-Spot for about 10 minutes before
I wanted to add an "Art" category, and was really quite surprised that I
couldn't. The situation sort of reminds me of bookmarks in Mozilla or
Netscape: the browser ships with some default ones, but could you
imagine not being able to add new folders to the root? I think that
would drive a lot of users nuts. We could, as you said, add the obvious
ones and leave it, but I am highly doubtful that any list of obvious
categories is going to satisfy even a majority of users.  

Tim: According to TagStore.cs, a category is a tag which can contain
other tags. In practice this appears to work out to that when
selecting/unselecting objects in the left hand pane, the user can select
images by a specific tag, or by the category they belong too. When a
category is selected, it automatically selects all its
subtags/subcategories, etc. 

I think having all categories at the root level would be a mistake too.
This is the way it is in Epiphany (though I think I remember reading
about it changing...) and when you get lots of categories, it gets to be
really painful.  

Mike Sassak

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]