Auto-select audio for editing

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Auto-select audio for editing

Peter Sampson-2
The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
 "Auto-select audio for editing"


1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
regard effects as editing.

2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
does not convey that.

3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.

We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
Undo or History and so lose their project contents.


I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.


We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Stevethefiddle
On 8 June 2017 at 13:20, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>  "Auto-select audio for editing"
>
>
> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he
> didn't normally
> regard effects as editing.

Imo, James is right. There's an important distinction between
"editing" and "processing".

Technically, "editing" just changes the order of samples, whereas
"processing" changes their values. This has important implications
when considering "lossless" manipulations and "dither".

Practically there are big differences - most obviously that Edit
command are in the Edit menu and effects are predominantly in the
Effect menu.

>
> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and
> the descriptor
> does not convey that.
>
> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard
> Delete key, Ctrl+K
> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the
> incautious user with
> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>
> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years
> - and we
> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or
> experience of
> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>
>
> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the
> terse "Auto-select" as
> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the
> new iconic
> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>
>
> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting
> on Auto-select, and
> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.

I've made my views known many times, but to reiterate briefly, a
straightforward solution would imo, be to make "select all if none..."
apply to effects only (and move the preference setting into the
"Effects" section of preferences).

Steve

>
> Cheers,
> Peter.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Cliff Scott
In reply to this post by Peter Sampson-2
If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.

Cliff

> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>  "Auto-select audio for editing"
>
>
> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
> regard effects as editing.
>
> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
> does not convey that.
>
> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>
> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>
>
> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>
>
> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?


Gale


On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:

> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>
> Cliff
>
>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>  "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>
>>
>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>> regard effects as editing.
>>
>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>> does not convey that.
>>
>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>
>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>
>>
>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>
>>
>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Peter.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Stevethefiddle
On 8 June 2017 at 13:37, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8 June 2017 at 13:20, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>  "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>
>>
>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he
>> didn't normally
>> regard effects as editing.
>
> Imo, James is right. There's an important distinction between
> "editing" and "processing".
>
> Technically, "editing" just changes the order of samples, whereas
> "processing" changes their values. This has important implications
> when considering "lossless" manipulations and "dither".
>
> Practically there are big differences - most obviously that Edit
> command are in the Edit menu and effects are predominantly in the
> Effect menu.

There is definitely a possible confusion point there, but I did not
want to use more words than I have and I do think much more
flavour of what it does is given than by bare "Auto-select".

Unless someone thinks

"Auto-select audio for effects/edits"

is OK? Effects has the emphasis because it comes first.

We could have "for action" instead of "for editing" but I think
someone already did not like that.

My problem with "Auto-select" is that if someone tries it and
finds it doesn't auto-select all after record or import or however
they interpreted it, then they may just not bother to look it
up and miss out on something that they may find useful.


>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and
>> the descriptor
>> does not convey that.
>>
>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard
>> Delete key, Ctrl+K
>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the
>> incautious user with
>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>
>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years
>> - and we
>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or
>> experience of
>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>
>>
>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the
>> terse "Auto-select" as
>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the
>> new iconic
>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.

You have stunning faith that people will RTFM via an icon at the
other end of the prefs pane rather than head for a YouTube video
of Audacity 1.2.6. :=)

IMO to be much terser than we now are, we would need contextual
help or tooltips/help icons per item. That's a general feeling I have,
not just about Auto-select.


>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting
>> on Auto-select, and
>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>
> I've made my views known many times, but to reiterate briefly, a
> straightforward solution would imo, be to make "select all if none..."
> apply to effects only (and move the preference setting into the
> "Effects" section of preferences).

That throws out the baby with the bathwater IMO. To name
some, Copy, Duplicate and Clip Boundaries > Join or
Detach at Silences are really useful with Auto-select. Well
I use them like that anyway.

Auto-select on cuts and deletes have more downsides than
upsides, I think.


Gale

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Cliff Scott
In reply to this post by Gale
After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:

"Auto-select all if selection required."

This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.

Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.

Cliff

> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>
>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>> does not convey that.
>>>
>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>
>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>
>>>
>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>
>>>
>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter.
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>
> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>
> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>
> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.

Thanks, Cliff.

The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
we only select all in the selected track.

I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
get length-adjusted).

I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.

So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?


Gale


>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>>
>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>
>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>
>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Peter.
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Cliff Scott

> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>>
>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>>
>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>>
>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Thanks, Cliff.
>
> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
> we only select all in the selected track.
>
> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
> get length-adjusted).
>
> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>
> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>

I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio". How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well. Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.

Cliff

>
> Gale
>
>
>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>>
>>>> Cliff
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>>
>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
On 9 June 2017 at 19:09, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>>>
>>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>>>
>>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>>>
>>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>>
>> Thanks, Cliff.
>>
>> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
>> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
>> we only select all in the selected track.
>>
>> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
>> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
>> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
>> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
>> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
>> get length-adjusted).
>>
>> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>>
>> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>>
>
> I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio". How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well. Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.
>
> Cliff

"Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required" is not
quite correct either. That makes it look like there would be no
auto-select if no tracks were selected, whereas the entire project
would be auto-selected.

If you want a flavour of what is auto-selected, perhaps

"Auto-select entire track(s) if selection required".

More accurate (I think un-necessary):

"Auto-select all (or entire selected tracks) if selection required.


Gale

>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cliff
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Cliff Scott

> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 9 June 2017 at 19:09, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>>>>
>>>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>>>>
>>>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Cliff.
>>>
>>> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
>>> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
>>> we only select all in the selected track.
>>>
>>> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
>>> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
>>> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
>>> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
>>> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
>>> get length-adjusted).
>>>
>>> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>>>
>>> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>>>
>>
>> I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio". How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well. Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.
>>
>> Cliff
>
> "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required" is not
> quite correct either. That makes it look like there would be no
> auto-select if no tracks were selected, whereas the entire project
> would be auto-selected.
>
> If you want a flavour of what is auto-selected, perhaps
>
> "Auto-select entire track(s) if selection required".
>
> More accurate (I think un-necessary):
>
> "Auto-select all (or entire selected tracks) if selection required.
>
>
> Gale

I suppose there's no end to the challenge of saying a lot in a few words without some possibility of misunderstanding. I'll leave it up to you all to tweak as it needs to be.

Cliff

>
>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gale
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cliff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
I've gone for

"A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".

Perhaps this is controversial to those who dislike auto-select
but if does avoid mentioning "editing" which was found to be
confusing. You can see from the label what happens if the pref
is on or off (as with the "Record appends, instead of recording
new track") preference.


Gale


On 9 June 2017 at 22:05, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 June 2017 at 19:09, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>>>>>
>>>>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Cliff.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
>>>> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
>>>> we only select all in the selected track.
>>>>
>>>> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
>>>> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
>>>> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
>>>> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
>>>> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
>>>> get length-adjusted).
>>>>
>>>> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>>>>
>>>> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio". How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well. Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>
>> "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required" is not
>> quite correct either. That makes it look like there would be no
>> auto-select if no tracks were selected, whereas the entire project
>> would be auto-selected.
>>
>> If you want a flavour of what is auto-selected, perhaps
>>
>> "Auto-select entire track(s) if selection required".
>>
>> More accurate (I think un-necessary):
>>
>> "Auto-select all (or entire selected tracks) if selection required.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>
> I suppose there's no end to the challenge of saying a lot in a few words without some possibility of misunderstanding. I'll leave it up to you all to tweak as it needs to be.
>
> Cliff
>
>>
>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gale
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cliff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>>>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Peter Sampson-2


On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
I've gone for

"A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".

The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire tracks".

I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will select
in all tracks but limited to that time selection.

So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).


I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
"Auto-select audio for editing".

I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
effects and even deletions are all edits.

The only ones that aren't, are the analyze functions as they don't
change the audio - bt thta gray area can easily be lived with I think.

Peter.


 

Perhaps this is controversial to those who dislike auto-select
but if does avoid mentioning "editing" which was found to be
confusing. You can see from the label what happens if the pref
is on or off (as with the "Record appends, instead of recording
new track") preference.


Gale


On 9 June 2017 at 22:05, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 June 2017 at 19:09, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most informative wording for the general user would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>>>>>
>>>>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the selected track.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Cliff.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If there
>>>> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
>>>> we only select all in the selected track.
>>>>
>>>> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
>>>> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that you
>>>> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
>>>> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label track
>>>> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
>>>> get length-adjusted).
>>>>
>>>> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>>>>
>>>> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio". How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well. Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>
>> "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required" is not
>> quite correct either. That makes it look like there would be no
>> auto-select if no tracks were selected, whereas the entire project
>> would be auto-selected.
>>
>> If you want a flavour of what is auto-selected, perhaps
>>
>> "Auto-select entire track(s) if selection required".
>>
>> More accurate (I think un-necessary):
>>
>> "Auto-select all (or entire selected tracks) if selection required.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>
> I suppose there's no end to the challenge of saying a lot in a few words without some possibility of misunderstanding. I'll leave it up to you all to tweak as it needs to be.
>
> Cliff
>
>>
>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gale
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not intuitive to my way of thinking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cliff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>>>>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to him, as he didn't normally
>>>>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies to them, and the descriptor
>>>>>>>> does not convey that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>>>>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that the incautious user with
>>>>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire audio.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over the years - and we
>>>>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no wknowledge or experience of
>>>>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>>>>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise to use the new iconic
>>>>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut from acting on Auto-select, and
>>>>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I've gone for
>>
>> "A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".
>
>
> The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire
> tracks".
>
> I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will
> select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.
>
> So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).

Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).

Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We can't
make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
range is selected, it is correct.

Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I could
accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".

> I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
> "Auto-select audio for editing".

We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.


> I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
> in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
> effects and even deletions are all edits.

But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
before. And I accepted that point.

James added a vote page here
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording

Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
alternatives there.



Gale

> The only ones that aren't, are the analyze functions as they don't
> change the audio - bt thta gray area can easily be lived with I think.
>
> Peter.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps this is controversial to those who dislike auto-select
>> but if does avoid mentioning "editing" which was found to be
>> confusing. You can see from the label what happens if the pref
>> is on or off (as with the "Record appends, instead of recording
>> new track") preference.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 9 June 2017 at 22:05, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 9 June 2017 at 19:09, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:56 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 9 June 2017 at 01:57, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>> After following this thread I think the simplest and most
>> >>>>> informative wording for the general user would be:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Auto-select all if selection required."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This gets across the point that it only happens if there is a need
>> >>>>> for a selection and none exists and that it happens without user
>> >>>>> intervention. You can't add the word audio because if there are multiple
>> >>>>> tracks the user may wonder whether it will apply to all tracks or only the
>> >>>>> selected track.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks, Cliff.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The problem with that is that we don't necessarily select "all". If
>> >>>> there
>> >>>> is a cursor in one selected track and other tracks are not selected,
>> >>>> we only select all in the selected track.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I'll drop the word "audio". I thought it might be a good idea because
>> >>>> if you click in a label track then apply an effect, we message that
>> >>>> you
>> >>>> must select some audio. But if you have an unselected audio track
>> >>>> and label track with no time range then run an effect, the label
>> >>>> track
>> >>>> does get selected (and for example with Change Speed, the labels
>> >>>> get length-adjusted).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I guess "if selection required" is pretty clear.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So, what do we think of "Auto-select if selection required"?
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I understand the issue with "all". Similar to using the word "audio".
>> >>> How to make it clear that it is the selected track(s) that gets its content
>> >>> selected without the extra words is the challenge. "Auto-select entire
>> >>> selected track(s) if selection required". This says it all, but we're back
>> >>> to a bunch of words, however it is quite clear what it will do as well.
>> >>> Maybe we just have to live with a longer wording.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cliff
>> >>
>> >> "Auto-select entire selected track(s) if selection required" is not
>> >> quite correct either. That makes it look like there would be no
>> >> auto-select if no tracks were selected, whereas the entire project
>> >> would be auto-selected.
>> >>
>> >> If you want a flavour of what is auto-selected, perhaps
>> >>
>> >> "Auto-select entire track(s) if selection required".
>> >>
>> >> More accurate (I think un-necessary):
>> >>
>> >> "Auto-select all (or entire selected tracks) if selection required.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Gale
>> >
>> > I suppose there's no end to the challenge of saying a lot in a few words
>> > without some possibility of misunderstanding. I'll leave it up to you all to
>> > tweak as it needs to be.
>> >
>> > Cliff
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> So your vote Cliff is for what shortened wording?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Gale
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 14:12, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> If I can interject my thoughts here - Trying to see it as an
>> >>>>>>> uninitiated user Auto-select in its various forms to me does not imply what
>> >>>>>>> is happening, i.e. the whole audio track is selected. It certainly is not
>> >>>>>>> intuitive to my way of thinking.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Cliff
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Peter Sampson
>> >>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> The new nomenclature for "select all if none" is now:
>> >>>>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing"
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 1) James stated yesterday that this was slightly confusing to
>> >>>>>>>> him, as he didn't normally
>> >>>>>>>> regard effects as editing.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 2)  Analyzers cetainly aren't editing - but Auto-select applies
>> >>>>>>>> to them, and the descriptor
>> >>>>>>>> does not convey that.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> 3) Worse still is that Auto-select applies to deletion with the
>> >>>>>>>> keyboard Delete key, Ctrl+K
>> >>>>>>>> and Cut and there is no real indication in the descriptor  that
>> >>>>>>>> the incautious user with
>> >>>>>>>> Auto-select turned on could inadvertently delete their entire
>> >>>>>>>> audio.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> We know that 3 happens - we have had many posts on the Forum over
>> >>>>>>>> the years - and we
>> >>>>>>>> know that often the user panics in that situation and has no
>> >>>>>>>> wknowledge or experience of
>> >>>>>>>> Undo or History and so lose their project contents.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I can live with 2 - but 3 is a different matter.  This is why I
>> >>>>>>>> favoured the terse "Auto-select" as
>> >>>>>>>> the descriptor - that way the unkowledgeable user would be wise
>> >>>>>>>> to use the new iconic
>> >>>>>>>> help button to read more about Auto-select in the Manual.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> We could, of course, deal with 3 by preventing deletion and cut
>> >>>>>>>> from acting on Auto-select, and
>> >>>>>>>> I think Gale suggested this in a different thread a short while
>> >>>>>>>> ago.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>>>>> Peter.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org!
>> >>>>>>>> http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>>>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >>> [hidden email]
>> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Audacity-quality mailing list
>> > [hidden email]
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

James Crook
On 7/2/2017 7:18 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:

> On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I've gone for
>>>
>>> "A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".
>>
>> The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire
>> tracks".
>>
>> I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will
>> select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.
>>
>> So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).
> Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
> a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).
>
> Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We can't
> make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
> range is selected, it is correct.
>
> Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I could
> accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
> personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".
>
>> I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
>> "Auto-select audio for editing".
> We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.
>
>
>> I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
>> in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
>> effects and even deletions are all edits.
> But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
> before. And I accepted that point.
>
> James added a vote page here
> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording
>
> Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
> alternatives there.
We have a help button on the preferences page, so my view is that users can
a) Guess that 'auto-select' has something to do with automatically
making a selection.
b) Click on the help icon to find out more details.

So in my view
'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt.

'Auto-select audio for editing' is slightly worse, as it is not correct
and is longer.
'Auto-select instead of prompting for selection' is about as bad in
terms of usefulness, and is longer too.
'Auto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection' is
worse still, as it is incorrect and much longer.

'Auto-select, if selection required' is very marginally better than
'Auto-select audio for editing', but the comma is essential, and really,
it adds very little useful over just plain 'Auto-select'. In my opinion.


So if Peter can live with
"Auto-select, if selection required"

We have a solution.

--James.







>
>
>
> Gale
>


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Peter Sampson-2


On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 7/2/2017 7:18 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
I've gone for

"A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".

The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire
tracks".

I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will
select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.

So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).
Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).

Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We can't
make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
range is selected, it is correct.

Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I could
accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".

I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
"Auto-select audio for editing".
We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.


I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
effects and even deletions are all edits.
But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
before. And I accepted that point.

James added a vote page here
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording

Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
alternatives there.
We have a help button on the preferences page, so my view is that users can
a) Guess that 'auto-select' has something to do with automatically making a selection.
b) Click on the help icon to find out more details.

So in my view
'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt.

Like James I believe that 'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt, now that we have the help button.

But see below

 

'Auto-select audio for editing' is slightly worse, as it is not correct and is longer.
'Auto-select instead of prompting for selection' is about as bad in terms of usefulness, and is longer too.
'Auto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection' is worse still, as it is incorrect and much longer.

'Auto-select, if selection required' is very marginally better than 'Auto-select audio for editing', but the comma is essential, and really, it adds very little useful over just plain 'Auto-select'. In my opinion.


So if Peter can live with
"Auto-select, if selection required"

But in the interests of moving forward and moving on, I think I can live with that.


We have a solution.

Which should mean that we have a solution ...

Peter.
 

--James.










Gale



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


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by James Crook
We all know your view James. That may have been fine if we also had
context-sensitive help with anchors.

So my view remains that we can't be as terse as you want "Auto-select".


On 2 July 2017 at 19:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 7/2/2017 7:18 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>
>> On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've gone for
>>>>
>>>> "A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".
>>>
>>>
>>> The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire
>>> tracks".
>>>
>>> I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will
>>> select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.
>>>
>>> So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).
>>
>> Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
>> a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).
>>
>> Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We can't
>> make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
>> range is selected, it is correct.
>>
>> Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I
>> could
>> accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
>> personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".
>>
>>> I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
>>> "Auto-select audio for editing".
>>
>> We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.
>>
>>
>>> I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
>>> in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
>>> effects and even deletions are all edits.
>>
>> But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
>> before. And I accepted that point.
>>
>> James added a vote page here
>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording
>>
>> Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
>> alternatives there.
>
> We have a help button on the preferences page, so my view is that users can
> a) Guess that 'auto-select' has something to do with automatically making a
> selection.
> b) Click on the help icon to find out more details.
>
> So in my view
> 'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt.

Meaningless. Why did my recording not select itself? Some phrase
needs to get across this is selection for an operation.  The "for
editing," though wrong, did that.


> 'Auto-select audio for editing' is slightly worse, as it is not correct and
> is longer.
> 'Auto-select instead of prompting for selection' is about as bad in terms of
> usefulness, and is longer too.

Some users may be very keen to get rid of the prompt. Don't imagine
all are going to read the landing page (correctly). But we could reduce
the risk by saying in the Manual that this option gets rid of the prompt.


> 'Auto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection' is worse
> still, as it is incorrect and much longer.
>
> 'Auto-select, if selection required' is very marginally better than
> 'Auto-select audio for editing', but the comma is essential, and really, it
> adds very little useful over just plain 'Auto-select'. In my opinion.
>
>
> So if Peter can live with
> "Auto-select, if selection required"
>
> We have a solution.

Please consider that others may wish to vote.



Gale

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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

James Crook
On 7/2/2017 8:37 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:

> We all know your view James. That may have been fine if we also had
> context-sensitive help with anchors.
>
> So my view remains that we can't be as terse as you want "Auto-select".
>
>
> On 2 July 2017 at 19:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 7/2/2017 7:18 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>> On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I've gone for
>>>>>
>>>>> "A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".
>>>>
>>>> The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select "entire
>>>> tracks".
>>>>
>>>> I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now will
>>>> select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.
>>>>
>>>> So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).
>>> Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
>>> a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).
>>>
>>> Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We can't
>>> make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
>>> range is selected, it is correct.
>>>
>>> Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I
>>> could
>>> accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
>>> personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".
>>>
>>>> I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing".
>>> We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
>>>> in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
>>>> effects and even deletions are all edits.
>>> But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
>>> before. And I accepted that point.
>>>
>>> James added a vote page here
>>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording
>>>
>>> Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
>>> alternatives there.
>> We have a help button on the preferences page, so my view is that users can
>> a) Guess that 'auto-select' has something to do with automatically making a
>> selection.
>> b) Click on the help icon to find out more details.
>>
>> So in my view
>> 'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt.
> Meaningless. Why did my recording not select itself? Some phrase
> needs to get across this is selection for an operation.  The "for
> editing," though wrong, did that.
>
>
>> 'Auto-select audio for editing' is slightly worse, as it is not correct and
>> is longer.
>> 'Auto-select instead of prompting for selection' is about as bad in terms of
>> usefulness, and is longer too.
> Some users may be very keen to get rid of the prompt. Don't imagine
> all are going to read the landing page (correctly). But we could reduce
> the risk by saying in the Manual that this option gets rid of the prompt.
>
>
>> 'Auto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection' is worse
>> still, as it is incorrect and much longer.
>>
>> 'Auto-select, if selection required' is very marginally better than
>> 'Auto-select audio for editing', but the comma is essential, and really, it
>> adds very little useful over just plain 'Auto-select'. In my opinion.
>>
>>
>> So if Peter can live with
>> "Auto-select, if selection required"
>>
>> We have a solution.
> Please consider that others may wish to vote.
I did.  But my understanding is that we have a +1 from you, me, Peter
and Cliff for
"Auto-select, if selection required"

so it would take 5 people voting against it for us to end up with
something different.
I'll leave it on the wording talk page for a day or so, and see if 5
people, who have not expressed any opinion yet, do vote against it.

--James.

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


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

Re: Auto-select audio for editing

Gale
Administrator
Or a new suggestion could be so brilliant and terse that
everyone switches vote to it.


Gale


On 2 July 2017 at 20:55, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 7/2/2017 8:37 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>
>> We all know your view James. That may have been fine if we also had
>> context-sensitive help with anchors.
>>
>> So my view remains that we can't be as terse as you want "Auto-select".
>>
>>
>> On 2 July 2017 at 19:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7/2/2017 7:18 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2 July 2017 at 09:30, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've gone for
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "A&uto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The trouble with this is that now Auto-select doesn't just select
>>>>> "entire
>>>>> tracks".
>>>>>
>>>>> I you have a time selection with no tracks selected Auto-select now
>>>>> will
>>>>> select in all tracks but limited to that time selection.
>>>>>
>>>>> So your new message is actually incorrect (and potentially misleading).
>>>>
>>>> Yes in the fringe case where the noob has selected a range but not
>>>> a track (for which the prompt is "Disallowed", but no help is offered).
>>>>
>>>> Cliff was unhappy with the lack of specificity in "Auto-select". We
>>>> can't
>>>> make it clear for all cases but for the most common case where no time
>>>> range is selected, it is correct.
>>>>
>>>> Cliff suggested a watered down "Auto-select if selection required". I
>>>> could
>>>> accept that though it does not suggest much about what will happen and
>>>> personally I really like "instead of prompting for selection".
>>>>
>>>>> I still *much*  prefer what we had immediately before:
>>>>> "Auto-select audio for editing".
>>>>
>>>> We agreed to drop "for editing" because that is ambiguous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I don't see what is wrong with the use of the word "editing"
>>>>> in this context - all the manipulation of audio, application of
>>>>> effects and even deletions are all edits.
>>>>
>>>> But that is a complete reversal of what you (and James) said
>>>> before. And I accepted that point.
>>>>
>>>> James added a vote page here
>>>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Talk:Wording
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps Cliff or others may want to propose and vote for
>>>> alternatives there.
>>>
>>> We have a help button on the preferences page, so my view is that users
>>> can
>>> a) Guess that 'auto-select' has something to do with automatically making
>>> a
>>> selection.
>>> b) Click on the help icon to find out more details.
>>>
>>> So in my view
>>> 'Auto-select' is fine as the prompt.
>>
>> Meaningless. Why did my recording not select itself? Some phrase
>> needs to get across this is selection for an operation.  The "for
>> editing," though wrong, did that.
>>
>>
>>> 'Auto-select audio for editing' is slightly worse, as it is not correct
>>> and
>>> is longer.
>>> 'Auto-select instead of prompting for selection' is about as bad in terms
>>> of
>>> usefulness, and is longer too.
>>
>> Some users may be very keen to get rid of the prompt. Don't imagine
>> all are going to read the landing page (correctly). But we could reduce
>> the risk by saying in the Manual that this option gets rid of the prompt.
>>
>>
>>> 'Auto-select entire track(s) instead of prompting for selection' is worse
>>> still, as it is incorrect and much longer.
>>>
>>> 'Auto-select, if selection required' is very marginally better than
>>> 'Auto-select audio for editing', but the comma is essential, and really,
>>> it
>>> adds very little useful over just plain 'Auto-select'. In my opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> So if Peter can live with
>>> "Auto-select, if selection required"
>>>
>>> We have a solution.
>>
>> Please consider that others may wish to vote.
>
> I did.  But my understanding is that we have a +1 from you, me, Peter and
> Cliff for
> "Auto-select, if selection required"
>
> so it would take 5 people voting against it for us to end up with something
> different.
> I'll leave it on the wording talk page for a day or so, and see if 5 people,
> who have not expressed any opinion yet, do vote against it.
>
>
> --James.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

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