Additional selection option--would it be useful?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
49 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
Hi all

In the selection toolbar, we have currently the radio buttons "Length"
and "End".

I wonder if it would be useful to have an additional option "Width".

What it would do:
- "Selection Start" becomes "Selection Center"
- "Selection Length" becomes "Selection Width"

Possible applications
-Repair: put the cursor in the center of a destroyed passage, choose
width and extend it to max 128 samples.
- Crossfade Clips
Navigate to a clip boundary, choose width and extend the selection to
e.g. 4 seconds (2 seconds  on both sides).

Regards
Robert

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Stevethefiddle
On 6 May 2017 at 13:37, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> In the selection toolbar, we have currently the radio buttons "Length"
> and "End".
>
> I wonder if it would be useful to have an additional option "Width".
>
> What it would do:

On reading down your post this far, I have no idea what "width" might
do. That's a huge "minus" from a usability point of view.
Also, doesn't this belong on the QA list rather than devel ?

Steve


> - "Selection Start" becomes "Selection Center"
> - "Selection Length" becomes "Selection Width"
>
> Possible applications
> -Repair: put the cursor in the center of a destroyed passage, choose
> width and extend it to max 128 samples.
> - Crossfade Clips
> Navigate to a clip boundary, choose width and extend the selection to
> e.g. 4 seconds (2 seconds  on both sides).
>
> Regards
> Robert

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Robert Hänggi
On 6 May 2017 at 13:37, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all
>
> In the selection toolbar, we have currently the radio buttons "Length"
> and "End".
>
> I wonder if it would be useful to have an additional option "Width".
>
> What it would do:
> - "Selection Start" becomes "Selection Center"
> - "Selection Length" becomes "Selection Width"

Do I understand, Robert, that selecting the extra button "Width"
would rename/repurpose the first two spinboxes as you describe,
but that with "End" or "Length" selected, Selection Toolbar behaves
as now?

I am not sure about the difference between "Width" and "Length"
as we have now. Do you mean that "Width" is half the length?


Steve wrote:
> Doesn't this belong on the QA list rather than devel ?

I thought new features were on -devel as a general rule, unless
it's felt this is too speculative and lacking description of code
changes needed.


Gale


> Possible applications
> -Repair: put the cursor in the center of a destroyed passage, choose
> width and extend it to max 128 samples.
> - Crossfade Clips
> Navigate to a clip boundary, choose width and extend the selection to
> e.g. 4 seconds (2 seconds  on both sides).
>
> Regards
> Robert

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
On 06/05/2017, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 6 May 2017 at 13:37, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> In the selection toolbar, we have currently the radio buttons "Length"
>> and "End".
>>
>> I wonder if it would be useful to have an additional option "Width".
>>
>> What it would do:
>> - "Selection Start" becomes "Selection Center"
>> - "Selection Length" becomes "Selection Width"
>
> Do I understand, Robert, that selecting the extra button "Width"
> would rename/repurpose the first two spinboxes as you describe,
> but that with "End" or "Length" selected, Selection Toolbar behaves
> as now?
>
> I am not sure about the difference between "Width" and "Length"
> as we have now. Do you mean that "Width" is half the length?
>
It is actually the same length as Lengtht.
However, increasing and decreasing the width changes the value at both
ends simultaneously.
So, if you add 1 second, it will start half a second earlier and end
half a second later while the center value would not change.

It is similar to the option for Spectral Selection except that all is
linear (the center is really the middle point, no logarithms)

As I said, the Crossfading of clips is the ideal example. You could
navigate to a clip boundary, adjust the width, apply the effect and
undo and try again with another width.
Thus, you can stay in one control the whole time.

I don't say that it is a 20 times a day feature but a possible
enhancement nonetheless.

Robert

>
> Steve wrote:
>> Doesn't this belong on the QA list rather than devel ?
>
> I thought new features were on -devel as a general rule, unless
> it's felt this is too speculative and lacking description of code
> changes needed.
>
>
> Gale
>
>
>> Possible applications
>> -Repair: put the cursor in the center of a destroyed passage, choose
>> width and extend it to max 128 samples.
>> - Crossfade Clips
>> Navigate to a clip boundary, choose width and extend the selection to
>> e.g. 4 seconds (2 seconds  on both sides).
>>
>> Regards
>> Robert
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

MartynShaw
In reply to this post by Robert Hänggi
Hi Robert

I think this is quite a good idea, but I would re-frame it a little.  In the Selection Toolbar instead of:

"Selection Start:      (.) End  ()Length"

we could have

"Selection: (.) Start () Middle      (.) End  ()Length"

which is a minimal change to the interface, does not introduce a new word and all 4 combinations of the buttons have pretty obvious functionality.

Coding for this would be quite easy to do and restricted to one or two files, so pretty safe and easy to test.  Why not write it under EXPERIMENTAL so it can be tried out?

HTH
Martyn

On 6 May 2017 at 13:37, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all

In the selection toolbar, we have currently the radio buttons "Length"
and "End".

I wonder if it would be useful to have an additional option "Width".

What it would do:
- "Selection Start" becomes "Selection Center"
- "Selection Length" becomes "Selection Width"

Possible applications
-Repair: put the cursor in the center of a destroyed passage, choose
width and extend it to max 128 samples.
- Crossfade Clips
Navigate to a clip boundary, choose width and extend the selection to
e.g. 4 seconds (2 seconds  on both sides).

Regards
Robert

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Peter Sampson-2
I have a personal use case for this.

Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer Record
while I sleep.

The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the key things
to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which are somewhere
in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this respect.

So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.

Robert's suggestion would aid that.

Peter

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.

I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely nicely.

However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the change... ;)

1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
unintentionally.
Changing the value does not mean the same.
- with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
- with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.

Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
- "Span"
- "Extent"
...
that could serve as alias.

2. We have now two radio button groups.
As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn apart.
And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
pay off to have the combination Center+End?
Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
for the same reason.
I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
well, e.g. "Center/Right".

Robert

On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a personal use case for this.
>
> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer Record
> while I sleep.
>
> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the key
> things
> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which are
> somewhere
> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
> respect.
>
> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>
> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>
> Peter
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
Hmm.

The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.

Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.

-------------------------------------

Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):

The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
with options:

end
length
span

The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
start:' otherwise.

-------------------------------------

That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
on from the current design in HEAD.

There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
(inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.

I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.  
Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same time.

Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:

Start + End
Start + Length
Length + End
Center + Span

I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.  Perhaps used
as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
that way.

I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.  
That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
four new options at the top.

For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
the toolbar in more detail.

--James.




On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:

> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>
> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely nicely.
>
> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the change... ;)
>
> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
> unintentionally.
> Changing the value does not mean the same.
> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>
> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
> - "Span"
> - "Extent"
> ...
> that could serve as alias.
>
> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn apart.
> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
> for the same reason.
> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>
> Robert
>
> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>
>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer Record
>> while I sleep.
>>
>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the key
>> things
>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which are
>> somewhere
>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>> respect.
>>
>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>
>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>
>> Peter


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Gale
Administrator
If I'm correct in thinking that "Span" changed to "Length" shows
the same value, then I don't think calling it "Span" is sufficient.
I am not sure what to call it.

In the current implementation, the values of both sets of TimeText
controls usually change when the radio button is changed, which
is clear. Robert's proposal seems less clear to me for sighted users
than what we have now.

If we had Right/Center (or something) and End/Length pairs that
is clear, but to address the issue of VI users forgetting which
direction mode they have set, wouldn't those two pairs both have
to be over the second TimeText control? That would look bad.

Can we address this better by keeping the current implementation
and have Ctrl + F6 and its Shift variant go back to the Start/Center
pair even if focus was in the End/Length pair?

If that is too confusing, can VI users live with it until we have these
pair of buttons as a single "option combination" control?



Gale


On 19 May 2017 at 16:11, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hmm.
>
> The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.
>
> Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):
>
> The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
> with options:
>
> end
> length
> span
>
> The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
> title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
> start:' otherwise.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
> on from the current design in HEAD.
>
> There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
> (inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
> be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
> be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
> and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
> not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.
>
> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same time.
>
> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:
>
> Start + End
> Start + Length
> Length + End
> Center + Span
>
> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.  Perhaps used
> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
> that way.
>
> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
> four new options at the top.
>
> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
> the toolbar in more detail.
>
> --James.
>
>
>
>
> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>
>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely nicely.
>>
>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the change... ;)
>>
>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>> unintentionally.
>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>
>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
>> - "Span"
>> - "Extent"
>> ...
>> that could serve as alias.
>>
>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn apart.
>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>> for the same reason.
>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>
>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer Record
>>> while I sleep.
>>>
>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the key
>>> things
>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which are
>>> somewhere
>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>> respect.
>>>
>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>>
>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>
>>> Peter
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
In reply to this post by James Crook
On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hmm.
>
> The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.
>
> Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):
>
> The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
> with options:
>
> end
> length
> span
>
> The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
> title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
> start:' otherwise.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
> on from the current design in HEAD.
>
0> There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
> (inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
> be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
> be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
> and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
> not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.
>


I was about to ask you how you solved this implementation detail.
I would have expected that the "Span" could only be increased by
twos--manually  adjusting start and end would give the same.

Of course, there remains the problem with the center value not
displaying correctly if the length is odd.
There's no place for a ".5" or a ½.
Another possibility is to put ≈ (almost equal to) in front of the value.
And the simplest one (apart from leaving all how it is): Forget
"Center" altogether.
We could still nudge the selection by adjusting "Start".
The only important behaviour is that of "Span" which shrinks/grows the
selection of both sides.
In other words, you could still set the edit cursor to a specific
position and expand the selection afterwards to do for example Peter's
+/-15 minutes deletion.
It might even be better since it shows when we are at time zero with the start.


> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same time.
>
> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:
>
> Start + End
> Start + Length
> Length + End
> Center + Span
>
> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
+1
I was always for displaying start-length-end.

I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
keyboard, doesn't matter).

Imagine the following situation:
The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
length.
Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
"Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
Selection" as possible tooltips.
Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
without the Span box itself visible.

There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
the length.

------
For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
trim it, time stretch it or what?

Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.

Robert

> Perhaps used
> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
> that way.
>
> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
> four new options at the top.
>
> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
> the toolbar in more detail.
>
> --James.
>
>
>
>
> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>
>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>> nicely.
>>
>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>> change... ;)
>>
>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>> unintentionally.
>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>
>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
>> - "Span"
>> - "Extent"
>> ...
>> that could serve as alias.
>>
>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn apart.
>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>> for the same reason.
>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>
>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>> Record
>>> while I sleep.
>>>
>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>> key
>>> things
>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>> are
>>> somewhere
>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>> respect.
>>>
>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>>
>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>
>>> Peter
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
On 5/19/2017 8:52 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:

> On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hmm.
>>
>> The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.
>>
>> Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.
>>
>> -------------------------------------
>>
>> Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):
>>
>> The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
>> with options:
>>
>> end
>> length
>> span
>>
>> The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
>> title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
>> start:' otherwise.
>>
>> -------------------------------------
>>
>> That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
>> on from the current design in HEAD.
>>
> 0> There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
>> (inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
>> be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
>> be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
>> and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
>> not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.
>>
>
> I was about to ask you how you solved this implementation detail.
> I would have expected that the "Span" could only be increased by
> twos--manually  adjusting start and end would give the same.
>
> Of course, there remains the problem with the center value not
> displaying correctly if the length is odd.
> There's no place for a ".5" or a ½.
> Another possibility is to put ≈ (almost equal to) in front of the value.
> And the simplest one (apart from leaving all how it is): Forget
> "Center" altogether.
> We could still nudge the selection by adjusting "Start".
> The only important behaviour is that of "Span" which shrinks/grows the
> selection of both sides.
> In other words, you could still set the edit cursor to a specific
> position and expand the selection afterwards to do for example Peter's
> +/-15 minutes deletion.
> It might even be better since it shows when we are at time zero with the start.
Hmm.  A further detail of that is that "Span" could be allowed to
increment/decrement in units steps.  When span is an odd number of
units, incrementing/decrementing moves end but not start.  When it is an
even number, incrementing/decrementing moves start but not end.

>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same time.
>>
>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:
>>
>> Start + End
>> Start + Length
>> Length + End
>> Center + Span
>>
>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
> +1
> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>
> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>
> Imagine the following situation:
> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
> length.
> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
> Selection" as possible tooltips.
I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
designed to work fine without them.
I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.

I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start, end,
length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
(lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
of operation.

Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.

and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
isn't locked.
So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
shortcuts to set which value is locked.

We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or start
and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.

In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
values are shown.


> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
> without the Span box itself visible.
>
> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
> the length.
>
> ------
> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
> trim it, time stretch it or what?
My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate silence.

> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.

So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You select
them from the number-format drop-down menu.

Does that sound a good plan?

For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of the
values, without the underlying rules changing.



>
> Robert
>
>> Perhaps used
>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
>> that way.
>>
>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>> four new options at the top.
>>
>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>
>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>>> nicely.
>>>
>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>> change... ;)
>>>
>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>> unintentionally.
>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>
>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
>>> - "Span"
>>> - "Extent"
>>> ...
>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>
>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn apart.
>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>>> for the same reason.
>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>
>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>> Record
>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>
>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>>> key
>>>> things
>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>>> are
>>>> somewhere
>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>>> respect.
>>>>
>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>>>
>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 5/19/2017 8:52 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>> On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hmm.
>>>
>>> The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.
>>>
>>> Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):
>>>
>>> The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
>>> with options:
>>>
>>> end
>>> length
>>> span
>>>
>>> The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
>>> title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
>>> start:' otherwise.
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------
>>>
>>> That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
>>> on from the current design in HEAD.
>>>
>> 0> There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
>>> (inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
>>> be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
>>> be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
>>> and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
>>> not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.
>>>
>>
>> I was about to ask you how you solved this implementation detail.
>> I would have expected that the "Span" could only be increased by
>> twos--manually  adjusting start and end would give the same.
>>
>> Of course, there remains the problem with the center value not
>> displaying correctly if the length is odd.
>> There's no place for a ".5" or a ½.
>> Another possibility is to put ≈ (almost equal to) in front of the value.
>> And the simplest one (apart from leaving all how it is): Forget
>> "Center" altogether.
>> We could still nudge the selection by adjusting "Start".
>> The only important behaviour is that of "Span" which shrinks/grows the
>> selection of both sides.
>> In other words, you could still set the edit cursor to a specific
>> position and expand the selection afterwards to do for example Peter's
>> +/-15 minutes deletion.
>> It might even be better since it shows when we are at time zero with the
>> start.
> Hmm.  A further detail of that is that "Span" could be allowed to
> increment/decrement in units steps.  When span is an odd number of
> units, incrementing/decrementing moves end but not start.  When it is an
> even number, incrementing/decrementing moves start but not end.

What's the current behaviour if "Snap-to" is off?
As I understand it, the project rate is basis for the division.
The controls show a rounded value according to the format. Changing
values there will "snap to" whole numbers whereas expanding by
keyboard can still "destroy" integer values (silently rounded behind
the scenes).


Let's suppose the format is HH:MM:SS
and the selection is seconds 1-2-3
If we engage Center/span, the readings would be
Span: 3 s
Center: 2 s (internally 1.5 s)
increasing the Center can be done by units but it must not be rounded.
increasing by one gives
Span: 3 (seconds 2-3-4)
Center: 3 (internally 2.5)

If we adjust the Span, it should only be done in double-units if
preserving the Span is desired. Increasing the former selection by 2
gives
Span: 5 (seconds 1-2-3-4-5)
Center: 3 (internally 2.5)

As you've pointed out, increasing the Length/Span  by only one needs a
preferred direction to add units, alternating between start and end.
Starting from the 2-3-4 example, this would give:
2-3-4, Center 3 (internally 2.5)
2-3-4-5 Center 3 (internally 3)
1-2-3-4-5, Center 3 (internally 2.5)
1-2-3-4-5-6, Center 3 (internally 3)
Is that correct?
The center oscillates internally but stays the same in the display
with a slight bias towards the right at times ("Floor" instead of
"Round" would do the opposite).

As I said, we could do without Center if we don't want keep internal fractions.
Start would go 2-2-1-1-... internally and externally.

Robert

>
>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>> time.
>>>
>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:
>>>
>>> Start + End
>>> Start + Length
>>> Length + End
>>> Center + Span
>>>
>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>> +1
>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>
>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>
>> Imagine the following situation:
>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>> length.
>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
> designed to work fine without them.
> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>
> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start, end,
> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
> of operation.
>
> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>
> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
> isn't locked.
> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>
> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or start
> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>
> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
> values are shown.
>
>
>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>
>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>> the length.
>>
>> ------
>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate silence.
>
>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>
> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You select
> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>
> Does that sound a good plan?
>
> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of the
> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>
>
>
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>> Perhaps used
>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
>>> that way.
>>>
>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>> four new options at the top.
>>>
>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>
>>> --James.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>
>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>>>> nicely.
>>>>
>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>> change... ;)
>>>>
>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>> unintentionally.
>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
>>>> - "Span"
>>>> - "Extent"
>>>> ...
>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>
>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>> apart.
>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>>>> for the same reason.
>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>> Record
>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>>>> key
>>>>> things
>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>>>> are
>>>>> somewhere
>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>>>> respect.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
On 5/20/2017 1:06 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:

> On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 5/19/2017 8:52 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>> On 19/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Hmm.
>>>>
>>>> The tab order problem can be fixed by code to set the tab order.
>>>>
>>>> Let me check I have understood your proposal about point 1.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Robert's proposal (adapted very slightly):
>>>>
>>>> The second numeric control of the pair has a radio button group above it
>>>> with options:
>>>>
>>>> end
>>>> length
>>>> span
>>>>
>>>> The first numeric control of the pair has no radio button.  It has a
>>>> title that changes to 'Selection center:' if using span, 'Selection
>>>> start:' otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> That seems very doable, and if that would work a lot better, let's move
>>>> on from the current design in HEAD.
>>>>
>>> 0> There is a small detail, that if we want a span from sample 101 to 104
>>>> (inclusive) the center needs to be at 102.5.  and the span length must
>>>> be odd.  If we want a span from sample 101 to 105, the center needs to
>>>> be at 103, and the span length must be even.  I 'fudged' that for now,
>>>> and e.g if you are working in NTSC frames, center is at whole frames,
>>>> not half frames, so there is a loss of precision if using center.
>>>>
>>> I was about to ask you how you solved this implementation detail.
>>> I would have expected that the "Span" could only be increased by
>>> twos--manually  adjusting start and end would give the same.
>>>
>>> Of course, there remains the problem with the center value not
>>> displaying correctly if the length is odd.
>>> There's no place for a ".5" or a ½.
>>> Another possibility is to put ≈ (almost equal to) in front of the value.
>>> And the simplest one (apart from leaving all how it is): Forget
>>> "Center" altogether.
>>> We could still nudge the selection by adjusting "Start".
>>> The only important behaviour is that of "Span" which shrinks/grows the
>>> selection of both sides.
>>> In other words, you could still set the edit cursor to a specific
>>> position and expand the selection afterwards to do for example Peter's
>>> +/-15 minutes deletion.
>>> It might even be better since it shows when we are at time zero with the
>>> start.
>> Hmm.  A further detail of that is that "Span" could be allowed to
>> increment/decrement in units steps.  When span is an odd number of
>> units, incrementing/decrementing moves end but not start.  When it is an
>> even number, incrementing/decrementing moves start but not end.
> What's the current behaviour if "Snap-to" is off?
The current behaviour is 'a bit wild' IF you have center-length as your
choice, and are (attempting to modify) length by single samples.  The
round trips and rounding (currently) can even lead to incrementing
length having no effect on length at all (a bug).

If you are incrementing in 10's of samples, it seems to be OK.  If you
are working with just start-end-length you should be OK too.

I can (and should) fix this, probably using the alternating approach.


> As I understand it, the project rate is basis for the division.
> The controls show a rounded value according to the format. Changing
> values there will "snap to" whole numbers whereas expanding by
> keyboard can still "destroy" integer values (silently rounded behind
> the scenes).
>
>
> Let's suppose the format is HH:MM:SS
> and the selection is seconds 1-2-3
> If we engage Center/span, the readings would be
> Span: 3 s
> Center: 2 s (internally 1.5 s)
> increasing the Center can be done by units but it must not be rounded.
> increasing by one gives
> Span: 3 (seconds 2-3-4)
> Center: 3 (internally 2.5)
>
> If we adjust the Span, it should only be done in double-units if
> preserving the Span is desired. Increasing the former selection by 2
> gives
> Span: 5 (seconds 1-2-3-4-5)
> Center: 3 (internally 2.5)
>
> As you've pointed out, increasing the Length/Span  by only one needs a
> preferred direction to add units, alternating between start and end.
> Starting from the 2-3-4 example, this would give:
> 2-3-4, Center 3 (internally 2.5)
> 2-3-4-5 Center 3 (internally 3)
> 1-2-3-4-5, Center 3 (internally 2.5)
> 1-2-3-4-5-6, Center 3 (internally 3)
> Is that correct?
> The center oscillates internally but stays the same in the display
> with a slight bias towards the right at times ("Floor" instead of
> "Round" would do the opposite).
>
> As I said, we could do without Center if we don't want keep internal fractions.
> Start would go 2-2-1-1-... internally and externally.
I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)

Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?  
Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.



>
> Robert
>
>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want options:
>>>>
>>>> Start + End
>>>> Start + Length
>>>> Length + End
>>>> Center + Span
>>>>
>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length and
>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>> +1
>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>
>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>
>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>> length.
>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>> designed to work fine without them.
>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>
>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start, end,
>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>> of operation.
>>
>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>
>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>> isn't locked.
>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>
>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or start
>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>
>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>> values are shown.
>>
>>
>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>
>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>> the length.
>>>
>>> ------
>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate silence.
>>
>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You select
>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>
>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>
>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of the
>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>>> Perhaps used
>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication of
>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
>>>> that way.
>>>>
>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them to
>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>
>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>
>>>> --James.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such as
>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>> ...
>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>> apart.
>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>> Record
>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>>>>> key
>>>>>> things
>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour mark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
(snip)
> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>
> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>
It does not yet appeal to me.

I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
modification:

1. Start End and Length are always shown

2. The radio group would look something like:

"Move Start/End

* Free  (same as currently "End")
* together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
(optionally:)
* Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
at the same time in the opposite direction)

Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
only be stretched but not moved.
Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
Perhaps
"Move Start/End"
...
* When Adjusting Length"

Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the selection.

However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
your changes).
The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
time displayed.
The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it checked.

The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
further development will have.

Robert

>
>
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>> options:
>>>>>
>>>>> Start + End
>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>> Length + End
>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>
>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>> and
>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>> +1
>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>
>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>
>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>> length.
>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>
>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start, end,
>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>> of operation.
>>>
>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>
>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>> isn't locked.
>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>
>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or start
>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>
>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>> values are shown.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>
>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>> the length.
>>>>
>>>> ------
>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>> silence.
>>>
>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You select
>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>
>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>
>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of the
>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>> of
>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
>>>>> that way.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>> to
>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>
>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>
>>>>> --James.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
Robert,

How about if the options are  to show:

Start - End
Start - Length
Length - End
Start - End - Length
Start - End - Length - Center.

If you use any of the first three, it is simple and easy to understand.  
You change one, and the other one stays fixed.

If you are a more advanced user, and have the space on screen, you might
use one of the last two options.  If you want to set Length and End, for
example, you edit Length, and then edit End, or the other way round.  
Start,  and Center if it is shown, will update as needed.

That does mean that if you want to work with center then you need the
full display of Start-End-Length-Center.  But I think that is reasonable.


--James.


On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:

> (snip)
>> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
>> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>>
>> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
>> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
>> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>>
> It does not yet appeal to me.
>
> I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
> modification:
>
> 1. Start End and Length are always shown
>
> 2. The radio group would look something like:
>
> "Move Start/End
>
> * Free  (same as currently "End")
> * together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
> possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
> (optionally:)
> * Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
> at the same time in the opposite direction)
>
> Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
> only be stretched but not moved.
> Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
> other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
> However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
> Perhaps
> "Move Start/End"
> ...
> * When Adjusting Length"
>
> Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the selection.
>
> However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
> your changes).
> The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
> time displayed.
> The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it checked.
>
> The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
> further development will have.
>
> Robert
>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as for
>>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length + End'
>>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Start + End
>>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>>> Length + End
>>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>>> +1
>>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>>
>>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>>> length.
>>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start, end,
>>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>>> of operation.
>>>>
>>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>>
>>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>>> isn't locked.
>>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>>
>>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or start
>>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>>> values are shown.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>>> the length.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------
>>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>>> silence.
>>>>
>>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You select
>>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>>
>>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>>
>>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of the
>>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Robert
>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its length)
>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to change
>>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take a
>>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For 2.2.0
>>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all four
>>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to configure
>>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --James.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected, namely
>>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length" control.
>>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right only
>>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities such
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is confusing
>>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does it
>>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length" and
>>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of the
>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station) which
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in this
>>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Robert Hänggi
On 20/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Robert,
>
> How about if the options are  to show:
>
> Start - End
> Start - Length
> Length - End
> Start - End - Length
> Start - End - Length - Center.
>
> If you use any of the first three, it is simple and easy to understand.
> You change one, and the other one stays fixed.
>
> If you are a more advanced user, and have the space on screen, you might
> use one of the last two options.  If you want to set Length and End, for
> example, you edit Length, and then edit End, or the other way round.
> Start,  and Center if it is shown, will update as needed.
>

Sounds good.
Where do you want to place these options?
I would put them into a combo box above the controls (first tab order
when approaching from "Snap-to".
It shouldn't go into the context menu since it is hard to discover,
the tool tip to explain it and formats at the same time would be to
verbose and we have certainly already a lot of entries there (At one
time or another, we will have to add measures and bars as well).

If not too difficult, I would also add a two (or three) controls
option with Center.
Center would move the selection and length would shrink or grow in the
fashion we've elaborated.

Robert


> That does mean that if you want to work with center then you need the
> full display of Start-End-Length-Center.  But I think that is reasonable.
>
>
> --James.
>
>
> On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>> (snip)
>>> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
>>> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>>>
>>> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
>>> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
>>> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>>>
>> It does not yet appeal to me.
>>
>> I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
>> modification:
>>
>> 1. Start End and Length are always shown
>>
>> 2. The radio group would look something like:
>>
>> "Move Start/End
>>
>> * Free  (same as currently "End")
>> * together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
>> possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
>> (optionally:)
>> * Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
>> at the same time in the opposite direction)
>>
>> Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
>> only be stretched but not moved.
>> Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
>> other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
>> However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
>> Perhaps
>> "Move Start/End"
>> ...
>> * When Adjusting Length"
>>
>> Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the
>> selection.
>>
>> However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
>> your changes).
>> The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
>> time displayed.
>> The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it
>> checked.
>>
>> The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
>> further development will have.
>>
>> Robert
>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length +
>>>>>>> End'
>>>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Start + End
>>>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>>>> Length + End
>>>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>>>> length.
>>>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start,
>>>>> end,
>>>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>>>> of operation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>>>
>>>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>>>> isn't locked.
>>>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>>>
>>>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or
>>>>> start
>>>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>>>> values are shown.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>>>> the length.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------
>>>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>>>> silence.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You
>>>>> select
>>>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>>>
>>>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of
>>>>> the
>>>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its
>>>>>>> length)
>>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to
>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For
>>>>>>> 2.2.0
>>>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all
>>>>>>> four
>>>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to
>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --James.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected,
>>>>>>>> namely
>>>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length"
>>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right
>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities
>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is
>>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length"
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station)
>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in
>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> audacity-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> audacity-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
On 5/20/2017 6:35 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:

> On 20/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Robert,
>>
>> How about if the options are  to show:
>>
>> Start - End
>> Start - Length
>> Length - End
>> Start - End - Length
>> Start - End - Length - Center.
>>
>> If you use any of the first three, it is simple and easy to understand.
>> You change one, and the other one stays fixed.
>>
>> If you are a more advanced user, and have the space on screen, you might
>> use one of the last two options.  If you want to set Length and End, for
>> example, you edit Length, and then edit End, or the other way round.
>> Start,  and Center if it is shown, will update as needed.
>>
> Sounds good.
> Where do you want to place these options?
> I would put them into a combo box above the controls (first tab order
> when approaching from "Snap-to".
I wanted to put them in the context menu, at the top of the list, just
for convenience/ease of programming, and then iterate on that after
2.2.0.  But OK, I won't.

A choice box like the snap-to one is the next easiest, but could not
live above the numerical controls as there is not enough room (and we
can't/shouldn't make the selection toolbar taller).

So I think for 2.2.0 it means a button on the toolbar that opens a
menu.  After 2.2.0 the button will open a dialog instead, and we can put
a lot more options in that dialog.

I'll also include 'Center - Length' and 'Start - Center - Length' as
options.

Good to go?

--James.


> It shouldn't go into the context menu since it is hard to discover,
> the tool tip to explain it and formats at the same time would be to
> verbose and we have certainly already a lot of entries there (At one
> time or another, we will have to add measures and bars as well).
>
> If not too difficult, I would also add a two (or three) controls
> option with Center.
> Center would move the selection and length would shrink or grow in the
> fashion we've elaborated.
>
> Robert
>
>
>> That does mean that if you want to work with center then you need the
>> full display of Start-End-Length-Center.  But I think that is reasonable.
>>
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>> On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
>>>> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>>>>
>>>> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
>>>> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
>>>> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>>>>
>>> It does not yet appeal to me.
>>>
>>> I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
>>> modification:
>>>
>>> 1. Start End and Length are always shown
>>>
>>> 2. The radio group would look something like:
>>>
>>> "Move Start/End
>>>
>>> * Free  (same as currently "End")
>>> * together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
>>> possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
>>> (optionally:)
>>> * Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
>>> at the same time in the opposite direction)
>>>
>>> Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
>>> only be stretched but not moved.
>>> Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
>>> other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
>>> However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
>>> Perhaps
>>> "Move Start/End"
>>> ...
>>> * When Adjusting Length"
>>>
>>> Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the
>>> selection.
>>>
>>> However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
>>> your changes).
>>> The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
>>> time displayed.
>>> The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it
>>> checked.
>>>
>>> The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
>>> further development will have.
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>>> Robert
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length +
>>>>>>>> End'
>>>>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Start + End
>>>>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>>>>> Length + End
>>>>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>>>>> length.
>>>>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>>>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>>>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>>>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>>>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start,
>>>>>> end,
>>>>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>>>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>>>>> of operation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>>>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>>>>> isn't locked.
>>>>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>>>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>>>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or
>>>>>> start
>>>>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>>>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>>>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>>>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>>>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>>>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>>>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>>>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>>>>> values are shown.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>>>>> the length.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>>>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>>>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>>>>> silence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>>>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>>>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You
>>>>>> select
>>>>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its
>>>>>>>> length)
>>>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to
>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>> 2.2.0
>>>>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all
>>>>>>>> four
>>>>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to
>>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --James.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected,
>>>>>>>>> namely
>>>>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length"
>>>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right
>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities
>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is
>>>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length"
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station)
>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Peter


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Federico Miyara

Dear all,

Some sort of multiselection would be useful in order to apply the same
effect to more thane one interval. In word processing software, for
instance, usually holding Ctrl allows multiselection.

Regards,

Federico


On 20/05/2017 15:04, James Crook wrote:

> On 5/20/2017 6:35 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>> On 20/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>> How about if the options are  to show:
>>>
>>> Start - End
>>> Start - Length
>>> Length - End
>>> Start - End - Length
>>> Start - End - Length - Center.
>>>
>>> If you use any of the first three, it is simple and easy to understand.
>>> You change one, and the other one stays fixed.
>>>
>>> If you are a more advanced user, and have the space on screen, you might
>>> use one of the last two options.  If you want to set Length and End, for
>>> example, you edit Length, and then edit End, or the other way round.
>>> Start,  and Center if it is shown, will update as needed.
>>>
>> Sounds good.
>> Where do you want to place these options?
>> I would put them into a combo box above the controls (first tab order
>> when approaching from "Snap-to".
> I wanted to put them in the context menu, at the top of the list, just
> for convenience/ease of programming, and then iterate on that after
> 2.2.0.  But OK, I won't.
>
> A choice box like the snap-to one is the next easiest, but could not
> live above the numerical controls as there is not enough room (and we
> can't/shouldn't make the selection toolbar taller).
>
> So I think for 2.2.0 it means a button on the toolbar that opens a
> menu.  After 2.2.0 the button will open a dialog instead, and we can put
> a lot more options in that dialog.
>
> I'll also include 'Center - Length' and 'Start - Center - Length' as
> options.
>
> Good to go?
>
> --James.
>
>
>> It shouldn't go into the context menu since it is hard to discover,
>> the tool tip to explain it and formats at the same time would be to
>> verbose and we have certainly already a lot of entries there (At one
>> time or another, we will have to add measures and bars as well).
>>
>> If not too difficult, I would also add a two (or three) controls
>> option with Center.
>> Center would move the selection and length would shrink or grow in the
>> fashion we've elaborated.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>>> That does mean that if you want to work with center then you need the
>>> full display of Start-End-Length-Center.  But I think that is reasonable.
>>>
>>>
>>> --James.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>> (snip)
>>>>> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
>>>>> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
>>>>> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
>>>>> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>>>>>
>>>> It does not yet appeal to me.
>>>>
>>>> I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
>>>> modification:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Start End and Length are always shown
>>>>
>>>> 2. The radio group would look something like:
>>>>
>>>> "Move Start/End
>>>>
>>>> * Free  (same as currently "End")
>>>> * together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
>>>> possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
>>>> (optionally:)
>>>> * Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
>>>> at the same time in the opposite direction)
>>>>
>>>> Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
>>>> only be stretched but not moved.
>>>> Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
>>>> other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
>>>> However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
>>>> Perhaps
>>>> "Move Start/End"
>>>> ...
>>>> * When Adjusting Length"
>>>>
>>>> Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the
>>>> selection.
>>>>
>>>> However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
>>>> your changes).
>>>> The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
>>>> time displayed.
>>>> The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it
>>>> checked.
>>>>
>>>> The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
>>>> further development will have.
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length +
>>>>>>>>> End'
>>>>>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Start + End
>>>>>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>>>>>> Length + End
>>>>>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>>>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>>>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>>>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>>>>>> length.
>>>>>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>>>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>>>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>>>>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>>>>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>>>>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>>>>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start,
>>>>>>> end,
>>>>>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>>>>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>>>>>> of operation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>>>>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>>>>>> isn't locked.
>>>>>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>>>>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>>>>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or
>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>>>>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>>>>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>>>>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>>>>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>>>>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>>>>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>>>>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>>>>>> values are shown.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>>>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>>>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>>>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>>>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>>>>>> the length.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>>>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>>>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>>>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>>>>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>>>>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>>>>>> silence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>>>>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>>>>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You
>>>>>>> select
>>>>>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its
>>>>>>>>> length)
>>>>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to
>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>>> 2.2.0
>>>>>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all
>>>>>>>>> four
>>>>>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to
>>>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --James.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected,
>>>>>>>>>> namely
>>>>>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length"
>>>>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right
>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities
>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is
>>>>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does
>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length"
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station)
>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Peter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> audacity-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

James Crook
On 5/21/2017 12:22 AM, Federico Miyara wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Some sort of multiselection would be useful in order to apply the same
> effect to more thane one interval. In word processing software, for
> instance, usually holding Ctrl allows multiselection.
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico
+1

Paul's work on refactoring the track panel is also making the code for
selection cleaner.  Cleaner code for selection, i.e. keeping it more
localised, is a prerequisite for multi-selection (in my opinion).

An apply-at-labels option would progress us quite a long way towards
true multi-selection.

The selection toolbar is currently designed for just one selection. With
two navigation buttons, selection toolbar could be made into a label (or
clip) navigator and we should, in my opinion, be putting selections,
clips and labels 'on the same footing' in a certain sense.

So, multi-selection is related to multi-clip and multi-labels in my
opinion.  We should be aiming to use the same code.

I think full multi-selection is too-much/too-much-risk for 2.2.0. Apply
effect at labels would be nice for 2.2.0 and it is a smaller safer step.

--James.


>
>
> On 20/05/2017 15:04, James Crook wrote:
>> On 5/20/2017 6:35 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>> On 20/05/2017, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Robert,
>>>>
>>>> How about if the options are  to show:
>>>>
>>>> Start - End
>>>> Start - Length
>>>> Length - End
>>>> Start - End - Length
>>>> Start - End - Length - Center.
>>>>
>>>> If you use any of the first three, it is simple and easy to understand.
>>>> You change one, and the other one stays fixed.
>>>>
>>>> If you are a more advanced user, and have the space on screen, you might
>>>> use one of the last two options.  If you want to set Length and End, for
>>>> example, you edit Length, and then edit End, or the other way round.
>>>> Start,  and Center if it is shown, will update as needed.
>>>>
>>> Sounds good.
>>> Where do you want to place these options?
>>> I would put them into a combo box above the controls (first tab order
>>> when approaching from "Snap-to".
>> I wanted to put them in the context menu, at the top of the list, just
>> for convenience/ease of programming, and then iterate on that after
>> 2.2.0.  But OK, I won't.
>>
>> A choice box like the snap-to one is the next easiest, but could not
>> live above the numerical controls as there is not enough room (and we
>> can't/shouldn't make the selection toolbar taller).
>>
>> So I think for 2.2.0 it means a button on the toolbar that opens a
>> menu.  After 2.2.0 the button will open a dialog instead, and we can put
>> a lot more options in that dialog.
>>
>> I'll also include 'Center - Length' and 'Start - Center - Length' as
>> options.
>>
>> Good to go?
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>>> It shouldn't go into the context menu since it is hard to discover,
>>> the tool tip to explain it and formats at the same time would be to
>>> verbose and we have certainly already a lot of entries there (At one
>>> time or another, we will have to add measures and bars as well).
>>>
>>> If not too difficult, I would also add a two (or three) controls
>>> option with Center.
>>> Center would move the selection and length would shrink or grow in the
>>> fashion we've elaborated.
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>>
>>>> That does mean that if you want to work with center then you need the
>>>> full display of Start-End-Length-Center.  But I think that is reasonable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --James.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>> (snip)
>>>>>> I don't want to go as far as displaying half sample values, so center
>>>>>> would be shown rounded to nearest sample (for 2.2.0)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does the basic plan of doing away with the radio buttons and instead
>>>>>> using the format menu to select format and fields-to-show sound good?
>>>>>> Instead of radio buttons we would have field names above the fields.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It does not yet appeal to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would probably stick to the radio buttons for now but with a bit of
>>>>> modification:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Start End and Length are always shown
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. The radio group would look something like:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Move Start/End
>>>>>
>>>>> * Free  (same as currently "End")
>>>>> * together (Same as "Length" and adjusting start but it is also
>>>>> possible to move the selection by changing the End value)
>>>>> (optionally:)
>>>>> * Oppositely (Comparable to the Span scheme, one entry moves the other
>>>>> at the same time in the opposite direction)
>>>>>
>>>>> Ideally, "end" would change to "Center", otherwise the selection could
>>>>> only be stretched but not moved.
>>>>> Alternatively, only the length control will affect the length and the
>>>>> other two would move the entire selection. This is probably better.
>>>>> However, this is difficult to express as a radio button label
>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>> "Move Start/End"
>>>>> ...
>>>>> * When Adjusting Length"
>>>>>
>>>>> Visually, this could be indicated by drawing a center line within the
>>>>> selection.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I won't be angry if you omit the last radio button (or revert
>>>>> your changes).
>>>>> The important point is that we have all three controls at the same
>>>>> time displayed.
>>>>> The second choice is the most versatile and I would probably keep it
>>>>> checked.
>>>>>
>>>>> The task is the more difficult as we don't know what implications
>>>>> further development will have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to think a bit about the future, as to how to deal with
>>>>>>>>>> both labels and clips 'in the same way' using the selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>>>> labels we would like to be able to set mid point and length just as
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> selections.  We also potentially have multiple labels that share end
>>>>>>>>>> points, so the end of one label is the start of the next.  For clips,
>>>>>>>>>> length may be read-only information but end or start can be changed.
>>>>>>>>>> Dealing with clips suggests that we also want to support 'Length +
>>>>>>>>>> End'
>>>>>>>>>> as a combination, especially when lining things up to end at the same
>>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Translating that point back to the Selection Toolbar, we'd want
>>>>>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Start + End
>>>>>>>>>> Start + Length
>>>>>>>>>> Length + End
>>>>>>>>>> Center + Span
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think radio buttons no longer suit.   Instead I'm suggesting titles
>>>>>>>>>> above the toolbar fields, and elsewhere you select which fields to
>>>>>>>>>> show.  Potentially there would be a lot more flexibility.  If you had
>>>>>>>>>> the space, you could choose, for example, to show start, end, length
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> center, all at the same time, and adjust any one of them.
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> I was always for displaying start-length-end.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've also contemplated using modifiers in those fields (mouse or
>>>>>>>>> keyboard, doesn't matter).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Imagine the following situation:
>>>>>>>>> The user wants only the start and end times being displayed but at the
>>>>>>>>> same time being able to adjust those values without loosing the
>>>>>>>>> length.
>>>>>>>>> Pressing Shift while adjusting Start or End could do the trick.
>>>>>>>>> "Press Shift to Preserve the Length" or "Press Shift to Nudge
>>>>>>>>> Selection" as possible tooltips.
>>>>>>>> I see modifier keys as 'elaborations' on some method that ought to be
>>>>>>>> designed to work fine without them.
>>>>>>>> I am not keen on modifiers being the primary mechanism.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would prefer something like a drop down that chooses what value(s) to
>>>>>>>> preserve (read only) when making changes.  With four values (start,
>>>>>>>> end,
>>>>>>>> length, center) and two constraints (s+l=e, s+e=2c) we can preserve
>>>>>>>> (lock) one value and modify any of the others.  So there are four modes
>>>>>>>> of operation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Length locked, you can change any of start, end or center
>>>>>>>> Start locked, you can  change any of length, end or center.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and so on.  In each mode you can change any of the three values that
>>>>>>>> isn't locked.
>>>>>>>> So rather than modifiers, I'm suggesting a drop down, and keyboard
>>>>>>>> shortcuts to set which value is locked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We could also dispense with that entirely and simply lock the most
>>>>>>>> recently changed value.  So a user who sets start and then end, or
>>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>> and then length, or length and then center, will get exactly what they
>>>>>>>> want.  It is not a bad principle.  The principle is that whatever value
>>>>>>>> they set last is what they actually want for that value.  Users may not
>>>>>>>> figure out exactly what the rule is, but they won't be stuck.  If they
>>>>>>>> just edit the two values they want then they get the result they want.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the case of only showing two of the values, the behaviour is also
>>>>>>>> very understandable.  Whichever value you edit, 'the other one' is not
>>>>>>>> changed.  So 'lock the most recent' is a more general version of the
>>>>>>>> approach for showing two values, that works when three or all four
>>>>>>>> values are shown.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Equally, when Length is displayed, Shift could do the "Span" thing
>>>>>>>>> without the Span box itself visible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There's one disadvantage to the "Show all controls approach":
>>>>>>>>> Adjusting Start without a modifier will always modify the length as
>>>>>>>>> well, in other words, the "Start+Length" behaviour gets lost.
>>>>>>>>> You had to simulate this behaviour with "Center" which never modifies
>>>>>>>>> the length.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>>>> For Labels and Clips, we would have a slightly different behaviour, I
>>>>>>>>> think, and it needs a lot of discussion.
>>>>>>>>> For instance, will adjusting the start time of a clip move it around,
>>>>>>>>> trim it, time stretch it or what?
>>>>>>>> My assumption is that for clips, length is fixed.  You can only change
>>>>>>>> the length by acting on the clip, e.g with time stretch or truncate
>>>>>>>> silence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lots of possibilities and dangers as well.
>>>>>>>> So I am now a bit unsure what to implement.  I think I will just (for
>>>>>>>> now) offer the four options that just show two of the values. You
>>>>>>>> select
>>>>>>>> them from the number-format drop-down menu.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does that sound a good plan?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For a future Audacity, we know we can extend that to showing more of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> values, without the underlying rules changing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps used
>>>>>>>>>> as a clip or label explorer we could also add buttons for next
>>>>>>>>>> clip/label and previous clip/label on that toolbar, and an indication
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> whether to skip or select space between clips/labels when navigating
>>>>>>>>>> left/right. We could also walk the selection left/right (by its
>>>>>>>>>> length)
>>>>>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am not keen to change to end/length/span radio button only to
>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>> them again in the next iteration.  So I am suggesting we instead take
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> small step directly towards the very flexible selection bar.  For
>>>>>>>>>> 2.2.0
>>>>>>>>>> the words 'Center' and 'Span' would be read only text.  Changing them
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> show 'Start' 'End' would be done from the drop down on the numbers.
>>>>>>>>>> That pop-up menu, which currently only offers formats, would gain the
>>>>>>>>>> four new options at the top.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For some iteration later than 2.2.0 we can offer the option of all
>>>>>>>>>> four
>>>>>>>>>> fields at the same time, or the option to invoke a dialog to
>>>>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>>>>> the toolbar in more detail.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --James.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2017 2:58 PM, Robert Hänggi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks James for implementing Martin's and my idea.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've tested it with "Crossfade Clips" and it works as expected,
>>>>>>>>>>> namely
>>>>>>>>>>> nicely.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> However, I fear that the VI community won't be to happy about the
>>>>>>>>>>> change... ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1. The selected start option is not reflected by the "Length"
>>>>>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>>>>>> A VI user does only see the control name he's working with. He could
>>>>>>>>>>> have previously used the length control while in center mode and has
>>>>>>>>>>> meanwhile forgotten that it is in this mode (Ctrl+F6 would bring him
>>>>>>>>>>> back to "Length"). Thus he would change the selection on both sides
>>>>>>>>>>> unintentionally.
>>>>>>>>>>> Changing the value does not mean the same.
>>>>>>>>>>> - with start checked, the length will increase towards the right
>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>> - with Center checked, the length will increase in both directions.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, I would indicate the mode here as well.
>>>>>>>>>>> I previously called it "Width" but there are other possibilities
>>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> - "Span"
>>>>>>>>>>> - "Extent"
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>> that could serve as alias.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2. We have now two radio button groups.
>>>>>>>>>>> As mentioned earlier, the navigation in the selection bar is
>>>>>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>>>>>> for a keyboard user: The focus goes tab-wise from
>>>>>>>>>>> Start/Center -> End/Length -> Project Rate -> Snap to -> Selection
>>>>>>>>>>> Start -> Selection End -> Audio position -> Start/Center.
>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, radio buttons and the respective controls are torn
>>>>>>>>>>> apart.
>>>>>>>>>>> And I'm still not convinced that we need two separate groups; does
>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> pay off to have the combination Center+End?
>>>>>>>>>>> Note: the latter had to be renamed in the same fashion as "Length"
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> for the same reason.
>>>>>>>>>>> I would therefore just add a third radio button e.g. "Center/Span"
>>>>>>>>>>> alongside the known ones. If desired, the lost one could be added as
>>>>>>>>>>> well, e.g. "Center/Right".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/05/2017, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a personal use case for this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Every week I record a two-hour radio show with an unattended Timeer
>>>>>>>>>>>> Record
>>>>>>>>>>>> while I sleep.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The following morning I deal with the editing/processing.  One of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>>> to do is to find the adverts (for other shows from the station)
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of the show - DCFM is not time accurate/precise in
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> respect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So I create a selection window 15 mins each side of the one hour
>>>>>>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert's suggestion would aid that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>>>>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional selection option--would it be useful?

Federico Miyara

James,
 
I think full multi-selection is too-much/too-much-risk for 2.2.0. Apply 
effect at labels would be nice for 2.2.0 and it is a smaller safer step.

Apply effect at labels is a good compromise and would certainly suffice for the moment, but it should be applicable to given or selected label track(s) so that one could reserve other label track(s) for a different function, such as content description or playback control. And it is a fortunate fact that tracks already do support multi-selection.

Regards,

Federico
  



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
audacity-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel
123