Zoom menu

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Zoom menu

Peter Sampson-2
Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
subcommands there?

Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...

James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.

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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Gale
Administrator
I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
then down a list of eight items. David agreed with my point and
until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
in zoom.

And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
guidelines.

There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
users get to see them and use them.


Gale


On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
> subcommands there?
>
> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>
> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>
> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Peter Sampson-2


On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
then down a list of eight items.

In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom commands:
In, Normal, Out, Selection
To be at first order placement.

I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that these four
new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly simpler to comprehend.
And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users will use the
pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.

So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second level menu
"View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin the
"View>Zoom" submenu.

And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu "View>Zoom>One Pixel to"
in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.  Especially bearing in mind
that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up implementing
the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom Maximum"

Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to setting shortcuts
for them anyway - so there is no real need.

Peter.
 
David agreed with my point and
until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
in zoom.

And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
guidelines.

There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
users get to see them and use them.


Gale


On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
> subcommands there?
>
> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>
> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>
> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

James Crook
As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.

DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.

I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in DA.  They are not useful enough.
I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.  Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection, possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.


I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there.  But I probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.

--James.




On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews [hidden email] wrote:

I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
then down a list of eight items.

In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom commands:
In, Normal, Out, Selection
To be at first order placement.

I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
these four
new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly simpler to
comprehend.
And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users will use
the
pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.

So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
level menu
"View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
the
"View>Zoom" submenu.

And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu "View>Zoom>One
Pixel to"
in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.  Especially bearing
in mind
that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
implementing
the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
Maximum"
and "Zoom Preset":
http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar

Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
setting shortcuts
for them anyway - so there is no real need.

Peter.


David agreed with my point and
until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
in zoom.

And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
guidelines.

There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
users get to see them and use them.


Gale


On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson [hidden email]
wrote:
Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
subcommands there?

Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...

James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.

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
|

Re: Zoom menu

James Crook
We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle so
that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or low
zoom setting.

--James.


On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:

> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>
> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth
> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>
> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
> DA.  They are not useful enough.
> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>
>
> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>
> --James.
>
>
>
>
> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>
>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>> commands:
>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>> To be at first order placement.
>>
>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>> these four
>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>> simpler to
>> comprehend.
>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>> will use
>> the
>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>
>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
>> level menu
>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
>> the
>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>
>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>> "View>Zoom>One
>> Pixel to"
>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>> bearing
>> in mind
>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>> implementing
>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
>> Maximum"
>> and "Zoom Preset":
>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>
>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>> setting shortcuts
>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>
>> Peter.
>>
>>
>>> David agreed with my point and
>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>> in zoom.
>>>
>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>>> guidelines.
>>>
>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>> <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>
>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>
>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>
>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
How about:

View menu:
* Zoom
** Zoom In
** Zoom Normal
** Zoom Out
** Zoom to Selection
** spacer
** 1px to 1 second
** 1px to 10th second
** 1px to 100th second
** 1px to 1 millisecond


Steve



On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle so
> that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or low
> zoom setting.
>
> --James.
>
>
> On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>
>> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
>> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth
>> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>>
>> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>>
>>
>> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
>> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
>>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>
>>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>> commands:
>>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>> To be at first order placement.
>>>
>>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>>> these four
>>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>> simpler to
>>> comprehend.
>>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>> will use
>>> the
>>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>
>>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
>>> level menu
>>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
>>> the
>>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>
>>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>> "View>Zoom>One
>>> Pixel to"
>>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>> bearing
>>> in mind
>>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>>> implementing
>>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
>>> Maximum"
>>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>
>>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>>> setting shortcuts
>>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>>
>>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>> in zoom.
>>>>
>>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>>>> guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>>
>>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Peter Sampson-2


On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
How about:

View menu:
* Zoom
** Zoom In
** Zoom Normal
** Zoom Out
** Zoom to Selection
** spacer
** 1px to 1 second
** 1px to 10th second
** 1px to 100th second
** 1px to 1 millisecond

That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of the spacer.

But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their behaviour and
the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of proportional scaling,
like a map's scale say.

The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the zoom buttons,
are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be after using them - not
really so with these new commands.

I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea what zoom
level she might get when using these commands - she said:
"No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"

Peter
 


Steve



On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle so
> that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or low
> zoom setting.
>
> --James.
>
>
> On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>
>> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
>> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth
>> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>>
>> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>>
>>
>> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
>> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
>>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>
>>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>> commands:
>>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>> To be at first order placement.
>>>
>>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>>> these four
>>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>> simpler to
>>> comprehend.
>>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>> will use
>>> the
>>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>
>>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
>>> level menu
>>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
>>> the
>>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>
>>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>> "View>Zoom>One
>>> Pixel to"
>>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>> bearing
>>> in mind
>>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>>> implementing
>>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
>>> Maximum"
>>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>
>>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>>> setting shortcuts
>>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>>
>>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>> in zoom.
>>>>
>>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>>>> guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>>
>>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> View menu:
>> * Zoom
>> ** Zoom In
>> ** Zoom Normal
>> ** Zoom Out
>> ** Zoom to Selection
>> ** spacer
>> ** 1px to 1 second
>> ** 1px to 10th second
>> ** 1px to 100th second
>> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>
>
> That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of the
> spacer.
>
> But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
> behaviour and
> the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
> proportional scaling,
> like a map's scale say.
>
> The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the zoom
> buttons,
> are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be after
> using them - not
> really so with these new commands.
>
> I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea what
> zoom
> level she might get when using these commands - she said:
> "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"

Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
levels that are dependent on the display dpi.

Steve


>
> Peter
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle so
>> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or low
>> > zoom setting.
>> >
>> > --James.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>> >>
>> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
>> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth
>> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>> >>
>> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
>> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>> >>
>> >> --James.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>> >>>> action
>> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>> >>>
>> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>> >>> commands:
>> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>> >>> To be at first order placement.
>> >>>
>> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>> >>> these four
>> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>> >>> simpler to
>> >>> comprehend.
>> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>> >>> will use
>> >>> the
>> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>> >>>
>> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>> >>> second
>> >>> level menu
>> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>> >>> placedin
>> >>> the
>> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>> >>>
>> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>> >>> Pixel to"
>> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>> >>> bearing
>> >>> in mind
>> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>> >>> implementing
>> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>> >>> "Zoom
>> >>> Maximum"
>> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>> >>>
>> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>> >>> setting shortcuts
>> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>> >>>
>> >>> Peter.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>> >>>> in zoom.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>> >>>> guidelines.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Gale
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>> >>>>> subcommands there?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Peter Sampson-2
I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite laptop
which has a 1366x768 display.

With the Audacity window full screen
I pixel to:
1second => 20 minutes on screen
1/10 second => 2 minutes
1/100 second => 12 seconds
millisecond = 1.2 seconds

With the Audacity window default size
I pixel to:
1second => 12:45 on screen
1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
millisecond = 0.75 seconds

Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I can't see myself
ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a songsworth) and I
edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14, 28 and 56
on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.

I also agree with Steve when he says:
>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the display dpi.

So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.

Peter.


On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> View menu:
>> * Zoom
>> ** Zoom In
>> ** Zoom Normal
>> ** Zoom Out
>> ** Zoom to Selection
>> ** spacer
>> ** 1px to 1 second
>> ** 1px to 10th second
>> ** 1px to 100th second
>> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>
>
> That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of the
> spacer.
>
> But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
> behaviour and
> the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
> proportional scaling,
> like a map's scale say.
>
> The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the zoom
> buttons,
> are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be after
> using them - not
> really so with these new commands.
>
> I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea what
> zoom
> level she might get when using these commands - she said:
> "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"

Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
levels that are dependent on the display dpi.

Steve


>
> Peter
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle so
>> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or low
>> > zoom setting.
>> >
>> > --James.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>> >>
>> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
>> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth
>> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>> >>
>> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
>> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>> >>
>> >> --James.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>> >>>> action
>> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>> >>>
>> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>> >>> commands:
>> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>> >>> To be at first order placement.
>> >>>
>> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>> >>> these four
>> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>> >>> simpler to
>> >>> comprehend.
>> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>> >>> will use
>> >>> the
>> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>> >>>
>> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>> >>> second
>> >>> level menu
>> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>> >>> placedin
>> >>> the
>> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>> >>>
>> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>> >>> Pixel to"
>> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>> >>> bearing
>> >>> in mind
>> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>> >>> implementing
>> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>> >>> "Zoom
>> >>> Maximum"
>> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>> >>>
>> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>> >>> setting shortcuts
>> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>> >>>
>> >>> Peter.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>> >>>> in zoom.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>> >>>> guidelines.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Gale
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>> >>>>> subcommands there?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Peter Sampson-2
On 14 April 2017 at 09:08, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>> then down a list of eight items.
> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom commands:
> In, Normal, Out, Selection
> To be at first order placement.

Which I have so argued, LOL.


> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that these
> four
> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly simpler to
> comprehend.

I agree - I think it arguable that they are sufficiently different to
have their
own menu item, if the menu is already short.  The original "Set" name
was correct IMO.

The preset that zooms 1px  to 1 second is useless for a pop song length
track, compressing the track into the left corner.


> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users will use
> the
> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>
> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
> level menu
> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin the
> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>
> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu "View>Zoom>One
> Pixel to"
> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.  Especially bearing
> in mind
> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
> implementing
> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
> Maximum"
> and "Zoom Preset":
> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar

That depends what extra commands we add.


> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
> setting shortcuts
> for them anyway - so there is no real need.

I repeat my disagreement about that. If you can use the mouse to
some extent, it is often faster to keep using the mouse rather than
switch to a shortcut (assuming the mouse navigation distance is
not unreasonably extended).



Gale


>> David agreed with my point and
>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>> in zoom.
>>
>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>> guidelines.
>>
>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>> users get to see them and use them.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> > Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>> > in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>> > four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>> > subcommands there?
>> >
>> > Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>> >
>> > James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>> > to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>> >
>> > 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by James Crook
On 14 April 2017 at 11:44, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.

I would appreciate if you would not misrepresent me. Everything
can't be at the top level, and I like "somewhat" shorter menus. I am
also conscious that we actually need to use the app.

Perhaps the "1px to" items should not be in the Zoom menu at all
if they are only for VI users. I use some of them, by mouse, because
there are no other zoom presets yet. They could, at the cost of lower
discoverability, be just a command in Keyboard Preferences. And
I see James has just said that below.

I don't appreciate the reference to for-blind items as "junk".


Gale


> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>
> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle (which
> has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth between your
> two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>
> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in DA.
> They are not useful enough.
> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.  Instead in
> DA I will just do what I think right with the selection, possibly clearing
> the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>
>
> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there.  But I probably
> won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>
> --James.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
> then down a list of eight items.
>
> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom commands:
> In, Normal, Out, Selection
> To be at first order placement.
>
> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
> these four
> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly simpler to
> comprehend.
> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users will use
> the
> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>
> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
> level menu
> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
> the
> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>
> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu "View>Zoom>One
> Pixel to"
> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.  Especially bearing
> in mind
> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
> implementing
> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
> Maximum"
> and "Zoom Preset":
> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>
> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
> setting shortcuts
> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>
> Peter.
>
>
> David agreed with my point and
> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
> in zoom.
>
> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
> guidelines.
>
> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
> users get to see them and use them.
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
> subcommands there?
>
> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>
> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>
> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
Both Peter and myself, now that we've had chance to try these
commands, find them a bit peculiar, but I'd like to hear what David's
intention is regarding these commands.

Would it perhaps be more useful to have zoom levels for the number of
seconds shown on screen?

Steve

On 14 April 2017 at 20:33, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 14 April 2017 at 11:44, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>
> I would appreciate if you would not misrepresent me. Everything
> can't be at the top level, and I like "somewhat" shorter menus. I am
> also conscious that we actually need to use the app.
>
> Perhaps the "1px to" items should not be in the Zoom menu at all
> if they are only for VI users. I use some of them, by mouse, because
> there are no other zoom presets yet. They could, at the cost of lower
> discoverability, be just a command in Keyboard Preferences. And
> I see James has just said that below.
>
> I don't appreciate the reference to for-blind items as "junk".
>
>
> Gale
>
>
>> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>
>> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a menu.
>> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle (which
>> has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and forth between your
>> two most used zoom levels.   This would live under zoom.
>>
>> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in DA.
>> They are not useful enough.
>> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.  Instead in
>> DA I will just do what I think right with the selection, possibly clearing
>> the selection where there is no obvious best choice.
>>
>>
>> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a 4Blind
>> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there.  But I probably
>> won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive action
>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right and
>> then down a list of eight items.
>>
>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom commands:
>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>> To be at first order placement.
>>
>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important that
>> these four
>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly simpler to
>> comprehend.
>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users will use
>> the
>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>
>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the second
>> level menu
>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be placedin
>> the
>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>
>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu "View>Zoom>One
>> Pixel to"
>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.  Especially bearing
>> in mind
>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end up
>> implementing
>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for "Zoom
>> Maximum"
>> and "Zoom Preset":
>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>
>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort to
>> setting shortcuts
>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>
>> Peter.
>>
>>
>> David agreed with my point and
>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>> in zoom.
>>
>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against Microsoft
>> guidelines.
>>
>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>> users get to see them and use them.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of seconds
>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with its
>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>> subcommands there?
>>
>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>
>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>
>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Robert Hänggi
In reply to this post by Peter Sampson-2
Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:

The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
zoom level.
The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
of 2^x samples; x being the level.
1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so on.
However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
the rate of the track(s).
The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
very odd as mentioned.
I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
you can zoom--test it.
The DPI issue just complicates things further.

David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
or move the cursor in a more natural way.

However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
Here is what I would do:

1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
to' menu.
It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.

2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.

3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
and useful to sighted users.

Robert

2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>:

> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
> laptop
> which has a 1366x768 display.
>
> With the Audacity window full screen
> I pixel to:
> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>
> With the Audacity window default size
> I pixel to:
> 1second => 12:45 on screen
> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>
> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I
> can't see myself
> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
> songsworth) and I
> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14,
> 28 and 56
> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>
> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the
> display dpi.
>
> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>
> Peter.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
> <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>> [hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> How about:
>> >>
>> >> View menu:
>> >> * Zoom
>> >> ** Zoom In
>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>> >> ** Zoom Out
>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>> >> ** spacer
>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>> >
>> >
>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of
>> the
>> > spacer.
>> >
>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>> > behaviour and
>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>> > proportional scaling,
>> > like a map's scale say.
>> >
>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>> > zoom
>> > buttons,
>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>> after
>> > using them - not
>> > really so with these new commands.
>> >
>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea
>> what
>> > zoom
>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>
>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Steve
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle
>> so
>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>> >> > low
>> >> > zoom setting.
>> >> >
>> >> > --James.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>> menu.
>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>> >> >> forth
>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>> >> >> zoom.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>> choice.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>> 4Blind
>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --James.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>> [hidden email]>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>> >> >>>> action
>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>> >> >>>> and
>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>> >> >>> commands:
>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important
>> that
>> >> >>> these four
>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>> >> >>> simpler to
>> >> >>> comprehend.
>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>> >> >>> will use
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>> >> >>> second
>> >> >>> level menu
>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>> >> >>> placedin
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>> >> >>> bearing
>> >> >>> in mind
>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end
>> >> >>> up
>> >> >>> implementing
>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>> >> >>> "Zoom
>> >> >>> Maximum"
>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort
>> to
>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Peter.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Gale
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>> >> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>> seconds
>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>> >> >>>>> its
>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Gale
Administrator
Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
the logical outcome.

This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
about zooming - they set the step size.

And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
in the View menu.

And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
the buttons.


Gale


On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>
> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
> zoom level.
> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so on.
> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
> the rate of the track(s).
> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
> very odd as mentioned.
> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
> you can zoom--test it.
> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>
> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>
> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
> Here is what I would do:
>
> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
> to' menu.
> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>
> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>
> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
> and useful to sighted users.
>
> Robert
>
> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>:
>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>> laptop
>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>
>> With the Audacity window full screen
>> I pixel to:
>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>
>> With the Audacity window default size
>> I pixel to:
>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>
>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I
>> can't see myself
>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>> songsworth) and I
>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14,
>> 28 and 56
>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>
>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the
>> display dpi.
>>
>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>
>> Peter.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>> <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> How about:
>>> >>
>>> >> View menu:
>>> >> * Zoom
>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>> >> ** spacer
>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of
>>> the
>>> > spacer.
>>> >
>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>> > behaviour and
>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>> > proportional scaling,
>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>> >
>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>> > zoom
>>> > buttons,
>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>> after
>>> > using them - not
>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>> >
>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea
>>> what
>>> > zoom
>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>
>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Peter
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Steve
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle
>>> so
>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>> >> > low
>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --James.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>> menu.
>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>> >> >> forth
>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>> >> >> zoom.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>> choice.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>> 4Blind
>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --James.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>> >> >>>> action
>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>> >> >>>> and
>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>> >> >>> commands:
>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important
>>> that
>>> >> >>> these four
>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>> >> >>> will use
>>> >> >>> the
>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>> >> >>> second
>>> >> >>> level menu
>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>> >> >>> placedin
>>> >> >>> the
>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>> >> >>> bearing
>>> >> >>> in mind
>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end
>>> >> >>> up
>>> >> >>> implementing
>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort
>>> to
>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>> seconds
>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>> >> >>>>> its
>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
Thanks for the explanation Robert.

So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
benefits.

Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?

I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.

Steve


On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
> the logical outcome.
>
> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
> about zooming - they set the step size.
>
> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
> in the View menu.
>
> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
> the buttons.
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>
>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>> zoom level.
>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so on.
>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>> the rate of the track(s).
>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>> very odd as mentioned.
>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>> you can zoom--test it.
>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>
>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>
>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>> Here is what I would do:
>>
>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>> to' menu.
>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>
>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>
>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>> and useful to sighted users.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>:
>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>> laptop
>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>
>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>> I pixel to:
>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>
>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>> I pixel to:
>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>
>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I
>>> can't see myself
>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>> songsworth) and I
>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14,
>>> 28 and 56
>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>
>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the
>>> display dpi.
>>>
>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>> <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> How about:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> View menu:
>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of
>>>> the
>>>> > spacer.
>>>> >
>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>> > behaviour and
>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>> >
>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>> > zoom
>>>> > buttons,
>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>> after
>>>> > using them - not
>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>> >
>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea
>>>> what
>>>> > zoom
>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>
>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Peter
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Steve
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle
>>>> so
>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>> >> > low
>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > --James.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>> menu.
>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>> >> >> forth
>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>> choice.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>> 4Blind
>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important
>>>> that
>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>> >> >>> the
>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>> >> >>> second
>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>> >> >>> the
>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end
>>>> >> >>> up
>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort
>>>> to
>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>> seconds
>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Gale
Administrator
On 15 April 2017 at 11:45, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for the explanation Robert.
>
> So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
> including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
> that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
> benefits.
>
> Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?
>
> I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
> zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
> PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.

Unless we support microseconds, as 1.2 did. Of course, I know
you are opposed to that.



Gale


> Steve
>
>
> On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
>> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
>> the logical outcome.
>>
>> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
>> about zooming - they set the step size.
>>
>> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
>> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
>> in the View menu.
>>
>> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
>> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
>> the buttons.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>>
>>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>>> zoom level.
>>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so on.
>>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>>> the rate of the track(s).
>>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>>> very odd as mentioned.
>>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>>> you can zoom--test it.
>>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>>
>>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>>
>>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>>> Here is what I would do:
>>>
>>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>>> to' menu.
>>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>>
>>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>>
>>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>>> and useful to sighted users.
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>:
>>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>>> laptop
>>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>>
>>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>>> I pixel to:
>>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>>
>>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>>> I pixel to:
>>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>>
>>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I
>>>> can't see myself
>>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>>> songsworth) and I
>>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14,
>>>> 28 and 56
>>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>>
>>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the
>>>> display dpi.
>>>>
>>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>>
>>>> Peter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> How about:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> View menu:
>>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of
>>>>> the
>>>>> > spacer.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>>> > behaviour and
>>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>>> > zoom
>>>>> > buttons,
>>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>>> after
>>>>> > using them - not
>>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea
>>>>> what
>>>>> > zoom
>>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>>
>>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Peter
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Steve
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle
>>>>> so
>>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>>> >> > low
>>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > --James.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>>> menu.
>>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>>> >> >> forth
>>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>>> choice.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>>> 4Blind
>>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important
>>>>> that
>>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>>> >> >>> second
>>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end
>>>>> >> >>> up
>>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort
>>>>> to
>>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>>> seconds
>>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
On 15 April 2017 at 18:41, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 15 April 2017 at 11:45, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the explanation Robert.
>>
>> So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
>> including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
>> that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
>> benefits.
>>
>> Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?
>>
>> I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
>> zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
>> PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.
>
> Unless we support microseconds, as 1.2 did. Of course, I know
> you are opposed to that.

Even if we support nanoseconds and picoseconds, time periods less than
one sample period are meaningless for PCM audio. A sample is either
'in' the selection or 'not in' the selection. It's atomic, there is no
'half in'.

Steve

>
>
>
> Gale
>
>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
>>> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
>>> the logical outcome.
>>>
>>> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
>>> about zooming - they set the step size.
>>>
>>> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
>>> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
>>> in the View menu.
>>>
>>> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
>>> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
>>> the buttons.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>>>
>>>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>>>> zoom level.
>>>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>>>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>>>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so on.
>>>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>>>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>>>> the rate of the track(s).
>>>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>>>> very odd as mentioned.
>>>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>>>> you can zoom--test it.
>>>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>>>
>>>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>>>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>>>
>>>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>>>> Here is what I would do:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>>>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>>>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>>>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>>>> to' menu.
>>>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>>>
>>>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>>>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>>>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>>>
>>>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>>>> and useful to sighted users.
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>>>> laptop
>>>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and I
>>>>> can't see myself
>>>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>>>> songsworth) and I
>>>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me 14,
>>>>> 28 and 56
>>>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on the
>>>>> display dpi.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> How about:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> View menu:
>>>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > spacer.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>>>> > behaviour and
>>>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > buttons,
>>>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>>>> after
>>>>>> > using them - not
>>>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any idea
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Peter
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Steve
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the toggle
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>>>> >> > low
>>>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > --James.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top level.
>>>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>>>> menu.
>>>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom Toggle
>>>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>>>> >> >> forth
>>>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items in
>>>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the selection,
>>>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>>>> choice.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>>>> 4Blind
>>>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more important
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most users
>>>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>>>> >> >>> second
>>>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu. Especially
>>>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we end
>>>>>> >> >>> up
>>>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal for
>>>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally resort
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of making
>>>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short menu.
>>>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when more
>>>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>>>> seconds
>>>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we appear
>>>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Robert Hänggi
In reply to this post by Stevethefiddle
2017-04-15 12:45 GMT+02:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
> Thanks for the explanation Robert.
>
> So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
> including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
> that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
> benefits.
>
> Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?

Yes, that was my first thought too.
One that has the previously mentioned editable combo box ("project-rate style").
It could also have the controls for long and short seek which are
currently burried in preferences and the toggle to decouple the step
size from the zoom level.

Those values are just overrides of the defaults in preferences.
Ideally (and by long-term thinking), the step sizes should be saved in
the *.aup file (non-presence indicates the defaults and correlated
step/zoom).
The thinking behind this is that the user can define measure and beat
navigation for e.g. a song.

However, the reason that I've proposed a dialog is that toolbars
aren't easy to navigate to.
This could be made better if toolbar elements could directly be jumped
to by enabling assigning shortcuts to them or at least the parent
toolbar.
For instance, I could define shift+F3 to get to the Navigation toolbar
(focus in first control or the last used).


>
> I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
> zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
> PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.


For single tracks, the solution is quite simple: make the step size a
fraction of the track rate (and not the project rate, since the latter
can be changed without rendering).

For more tracks, it isn't that easy.
If the rates are for example 44100 and 48000 Hz, the least common step
sizes would be 147 and 160 samples. that's the point where the sample
number is an integer in both tracks.
This is fairly long: 1/300 second.
Thus, the lowest step size should actually be determined by the highest rate.

Anyway, I think this is a minute detail.

Robert



>
> Steve
>
>
> On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
>> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
>> the logical outcome.
>>
>> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
>> about zooming - they set the step size.
>>
>> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
>> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
>> in the View menu.
>>
>> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
>> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
>> the buttons.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>>
>>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>>> zoom level.
>>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so
>>> on.
>>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>>> the rate of the track(s).
>>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>>> very odd as mentioned.
>>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>>> you can zoom--test it.
>>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>>
>>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>>
>>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>>> Here is what I would do:
>>>
>>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>>> to' menu.
>>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>>
>>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>>
>>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>>> and useful to sighted users.
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>>> laptop
>>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>>
>>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>>> I pixel to:
>>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>>
>>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>>> I pixel to:
>>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>>
>>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and
>>>> I
>>>> can't see myself
>>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>>> songsworth) and I
>>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me
>>>> 14,
>>>> 28 and 56
>>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>>
>>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on
>>>>> the
>>>> display dpi.
>>>>
>>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>>
>>>> Peter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson
>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> How about:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> View menu:
>>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition
>>>>> > of
>>>>> the
>>>>> > spacer.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>>> > behaviour and
>>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>>> > zoom
>>>>> > buttons,
>>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>>> after
>>>>> > using them - not
>>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any
>>>>> > idea
>>>>> what
>>>>> > zoom
>>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>>
>>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Peter
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Steve
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the
>>>>> >> > toggle
>>>>> so
>>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>>> >> > low
>>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > --James.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top
>>>>> >> >> level.
>>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>>> menu.
>>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom
>>>>> >> >> Toggle
>>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>>> >> >> forth
>>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items
>>>>> >> >> in
>>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the
>>>>> >> >> selection,
>>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>>> choice.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>>> 4Blind
>>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more
>>>>> >> >>> important
>>>>> that
>>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most
>>>>> >> >>> users
>>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>>> >> >>> second
>>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.
>>>>> >> >>> Especially
>>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we
>>>>> >> >>> end
>>>>> >> >>> up
>>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal
>>>>> >> >>> for
>>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally
>>>>> >> >>> resort
>>>>> to
>>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of
>>>>> >> >>>> making
>>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short
>>>>> >> >>>> menu.
>>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when
>>>>> >> >>>> more
>>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>>> seconds
>>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we
>>>>> >> >>>>> appear
>>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>>> 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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Stevethefiddle
On 15 April 2017 at 21:14, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2017-04-15 12:45 GMT+02:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
>> Thanks for the explanation Robert.
>>
>> So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
>> including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
>> that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
>> benefits.
>>
>> Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?
>
> Yes, that was my first thought too.
> One that has the previously mentioned editable combo box ("project-rate style").
> It could also have the controls for long and short seek which are
> currently burried in preferences and the toggle to decouple the step
> size from the zoom level.

We could have a "Navigation toolbar options menu", like we have a
meters options menu.

>
> Those values are just overrides of the defaults in preferences.
> Ideally (and by long-term thinking), the step sizes should be saved in
> the *.aup file (non-presence indicates the defaults and correlated
> step/zoom).
> The thinking behind this is that the user can define measure and beat
> navigation for e.g. a song.
>
> However, the reason that I've proposed a dialog is that toolbars
> aren't easy to navigate to.
> This could be made better if toolbar elements could directly be jumped
> to by enabling assigning shortcuts to them or at least the parent
> toolbar.
> For instance, I could define shift+F3 to get to the Navigation toolbar
> (focus in first control or the last used).

Sounds like it would be a lot of work, but I like the idea of having a
keyboard shortcut to a  toolbar, and then presumably once you are 'in'
a toolbar you would be able to step from one toolbar button to the
next?


>
>
>>
>> I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
>> zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
>> PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.
>
>
> For single tracks, the solution is quite simple: make the step size a
> fraction of the track rate (and not the project rate, since the latter
> can be changed without rendering).
>
> For more tracks, it isn't that easy.
> If the rates are for example 44100 and 48000 Hz, the least common step
> sizes would be 147 and 160 samples. that's the point where the sample
> number is an integer in both tracks.
> This is fairly long: 1/300 second.
> Thus, the lowest step size should actually be determined by the highest rate.
>
> Anyway, I think this is a minute detail.

Small detail yes, but isn't it a bit silly that at maximum zoom and
default sample rate there's more than 120 steps to move 1 sample
period?

Steve

>
> Robert
>
>
>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
>>> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
>>> the logical outcome.
>>>
>>> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
>>> about zooming - they set the step size.
>>>
>>> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
>>> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
>>> in the View menu.
>>>
>>> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
>>> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
>>> the buttons.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>>>
>>>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>>>> zoom level.
>>>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>>>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>>>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so
>>>> on.
>>>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>>>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>>>> the rate of the track(s).
>>>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>>>> very odd as mentioned.
>>>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>>>> you can zoom--test it.
>>>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>>>
>>>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>>>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>>>
>>>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>>>> Here is what I would do:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>>>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>>>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>>>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>>>> to' menu.
>>>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>>>
>>>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>>>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>>>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>>>
>>>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>>>> and useful to sighted users.
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>>>> laptop
>>>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and
>>>>> I
>>>>> can't see myself
>>>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>>>> songsworth) and I
>>>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me
>>>>> 14,
>>>>> 28 and 56
>>>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on
>>>>>> the
>>>>> display dpi.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson
>>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> How about:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> View menu:
>>>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition
>>>>>> > of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > spacer.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>>>> > behaviour and
>>>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > buttons,
>>>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>>>> after
>>>>>> > using them - not
>>>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any
>>>>>> > idea
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Peter
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Steve
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the
>>>>>> >> > toggle
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>>>> >> > low
>>>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > --James.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top
>>>>>> >> >> level.
>>>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>>>> menu.
>>>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom
>>>>>> >> >> Toggle
>>>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>>>> >> >> forth
>>>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items
>>>>>> >> >> in
>>>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the
>>>>>> >> >> selection,
>>>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>>>> choice.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>>>> 4Blind
>>>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more
>>>>>> >> >>> important
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most
>>>>>> >> >>> users
>>>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>>>> >> >>> second
>>>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.
>>>>>> >> >>> Especially
>>>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we
>>>>>> >> >>> end
>>>>>> >> >>> up
>>>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal
>>>>>> >> >>> for
>>>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally
>>>>>> >> >>> resort
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of
>>>>>> >> >>>> making
>>>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short
>>>>>> >> >>>> menu.
>>>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when
>>>>>> >> >>>> more
>>>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>>>> seconds
>>>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we
>>>>>> >> >>>>> appear
>>>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
|

Re: Zoom menu

Peter Sampson-2


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 15 April 2017 at 21:14, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> 2017-04-15 12:45 GMT+02:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
>> Thanks for the explanation Robert.
>>
>> So really this feature is about "navigation", in which case I'm -1 for
>> including this feature in its current form. I would not have guessed
>> that was the purpose, and would have completely missed the intended
>> benefits.
>>
>> Perhaps a "Navigation Toolbar" could work better?
>
> Yes, that was my first thought too.
> One that has the previously mentioned editable combo box ("project-rate style").
> It could also have the controls for long and short seek which are
> currently burried in preferences and the toggle to decouple the step
> size from the zoom level.

We could have a "Navigation toolbar options menu", like we have a
meters options menu.

I'm liking this idea of a Nvigation Toolbar.

One advantage of such an approach is that those who do not want or need it
can readily hide it.

Peter.
 

>
> Those values are just overrides of the defaults in preferences.
> Ideally (and by long-term thinking), the step sizes should be saved in
> the *.aup file (non-presence indicates the defaults and correlated
> step/zoom).
> The thinking behind this is that the user can define measure and beat
> navigation for e.g. a song.
>
> However, the reason that I've proposed a dialog is that toolbars
> aren't easy to navigate to.
> This could be made better if toolbar elements could directly be jumped
> to by enabling assigning shortcuts to them or at least the parent
> toolbar.
> For instance, I could define shift+F3 to get to the Navigation toolbar
> (focus in first control or the last used).

Sounds like it would be a lot of work, but I like the idea of having a
keyboard shortcut to a  toolbar, and then presumably once you are 'in'
a toolbar you would be able to step from one toolbar button to the
next?


>
>
>>
>> I also notice another peculiarity about cursor key navigation: At high
>> zoom levels, what is the purpose of sub-pixel navigation steps? For
>> PCM audio, time periods shorter than a sample period are meaningless.
>
>
> For single tracks, the solution is quite simple: make the step size a
> fraction of the track rate (and not the project rate, since the latter
> can be changed without rendering).
>
> For more tracks, it isn't that easy.
> If the rates are for example 44100 and 48000 Hz, the least common step
> sizes would be 147 and 160 samples. that's the point where the sample
> number is an integer in both tracks.
> This is fairly long: 1/300 second.
> Thus, the lowest step size should actually be determined by the highest rate.
>
> Anyway, I think this is a minute detail.

Small detail yes, but isn't it a bit silly that at maximum zoom and
default sample rate there's more than 120 steps to move 1 sample
period?

Steve

>
> Robert
>
>
>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Robert.  I broadly agree with you, extending too to
>>> decoupling step size and zoom. I was thinking this myself as
>>> the logical outcome.
>>>
>>> This reiterates that these pixel commands are not primarily
>>> about zooming - they set the step size.
>>>
>>> And so if we have useful zoom presets for sighted users that
>>> have Toolbar button access, we don't need step size commands
>>> in the View menu.
>>>
>>> And I don't care if those sighted user zoom presets are one
>>> submenu deep in the View Menu, because mouse users can use
>>> the buttons.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 April 2017 at 21:00, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Just to recapitulate why those strange zoom levels:
>>>>
>>>> The step size for navigating with the arrow keys is correlated to the
>>>> zoom level.
>>>> The latter can be doubled or halved (zoom out/in) and this gives very
>>>> odd time intervals because we are exactly following a binary pattern
>>>> of 2^x samples; x being the level.
>>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 ... 256 512 samples (= zoom normal = level 9) 1024 and so
>>>> on.
>>>> However, this is only for a project rate of 44100 Hz true. Change this
>>>> setting and you have different step sizes, (in samples)regardless of
>>>> the rate of the track(s).
>>>> The step size as fractals of a second is approximately the same but
>>>> very odd as mentioned.
>>>> I don't know if a project rate change has also an impact on how "fast"
>>>> you can zoom--test it.
>>>> The DPI issue just complicates things further.
>>>>
>>>> David's intention is to give even step sizes in order to shift clips
>>>> or move the cursor in a more natural way.
>>>>
>>>> However, I don't think that we have reached the final solution yet.
>>>> Here is what I would do:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Creating a numeric input for the Step Size in seconds. The best
>>>> would be a editable combo box, exactly like the one for the project
>>>> rate. The field shows the current value and arrowing down lists
>>>> predefined values, namely the four that are now in the 'Zoom One Pixel
>>>> to' menu.
>>>> It would probably be best to have this in a dialog.
>>>>
>>>> 2. I would decouple zoom factor and step size, at least present a
>>>> preference option to do so. How often do I accidentally "destroy" the
>>>> carefully set step size by involuntary zooming.
>>>>
>>>> 3. replace the four pixel entries with something that is meaningful
>>>> and useful to sighted users.
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>> 2017-04-14 19:04 GMT+02:00, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> I'v ejust bee testing these zoom levels on my workhorse Tosh Satellite
>>>>> laptop
>>>>> which has a 1366x768 display.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window full screen
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 20 minutes on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 2 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 12 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 1.2 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Audacity window default size
>>>>> I pixel to:
>>>>> 1second => 12:45 on screen
>>>>> 1/10 second => 1:15 minutes
>>>>> 1/100 second => 7.5 seconds
>>>>> millisecond = 0.75 seconds
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I don't find any of these zoom levels particuarly useful and
>>>>> I
>>>>> can't see myself
>>>>> ever using them.  I tend to record with 3-6 minutes on-screen (a
>>>>> songsworth) and I
>>>>> edit at normal-zoomed-out-once(or twice) for location  (which give me
>>>>> 14,
>>>>> 28 and 56
>>>>> on-screen seconds) - and zoom in close for detailed edits.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also agree with Steve when he says:
>>>>>>It seems quite strange to me to have zoom levels that are dependent on
>>>>>> the
>>>>> display dpi.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we have zoom levels here that depend on the screen - most odd.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Steve the Fiddle
>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 April 2017 at 14:47, Peter Sampson
>>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Steve the Fiddle <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> How about:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> View menu:
>>>>>> >> * Zoom
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom In
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Normal
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom Out
>>>>>> >> ** Zoom to Selection
>>>>>> >> ** spacer
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 10th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 100th second
>>>>>> >> ** 1px to 1 millisecond
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > That was more or less my original suggestion - but with the addition
>>>>>> > of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > spacer.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > But I find these new commands pretty obscure and opaque as to their
>>>>>> > behaviour and
>>>>>> > the zoom level that will ensue.  Normally one would would think of
>>>>>> > proportional scaling,
>>>>>> > like a map's scale say.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The four pre-existing zoom commands, the ones that correspond to the
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > buttons,
>>>>>> > are in contrast, pretty clear to the user in what the result will be
>>>>>> after
>>>>>> > using them - not
>>>>>> > really so with these new commands.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I ran these past my "mystery shopper" and asked her if she had any
>>>>>> > idea
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> > zoom
>>>>>> > level she might get when using these commands - she said:
>>>>>> > "No idea at all. Who thinks in pixels?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having recently changed from a 'normal' resolution laptop display to a
>>>>>> fairly high dpi laptop display, I was surprised by how far 'zoomed
>>>>>> out' these new commands are. It seems quite strange to me to have zoom
>>>>>> levels that are dependent on the display dpi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Peter
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Steve
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On 14 April 2017 at 11:52, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > We could add an optional momentary sound (high or low) on the
>>>>>> >> > toggle
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> >> > that VI users get confirmation of whether they are on the high or
>>>>>> >> > low
>>>>>> >> > zoom setting.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > --James.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On 4/14/2017 11:44 AM, James Crook wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> As I have said before, Gale would like everything at the top
>>>>>> >> >> level.
>>>>>> >> >> David would like everything relevant to David at the top level.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> DA will remove these new zoom commands.  They are not needed in a
>>>>>> menu.
>>>>>> >> >> DA may, if I get round to it, add back 'Zoom Toggle'.  Zoom
>>>>>> >> >> Toggle
>>>>>> >> >> (which has an icon for it in the ImageCache) switches back and
>>>>>> >> >> forth
>>>>>> >> >> between your two most used zoom levels.   This would live under
>>>>>> >> >> zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove save and restore cursor position menu items
>>>>>> >> >> in
>>>>>> >> >> DA.  They are not useful enough.
>>>>>> >> >> I am going to remove the 'move selection' option in Align in DA.
>>>>>> >> >> Instead in DA I will just do what I think right with the
>>>>>> >> >> selection,
>>>>>> >> >> possibly clearing the selection where there is no obvious best
>>>>>> choice.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> I might float the idea of a keystroke combination to bring up a
>>>>>> 4Blind
>>>>>> >> >> pop-up menu.  We can then put all the new menu-junk there. But I
>>>>>> >> >> probably won't float that suggestion until DA 2.2.0x is released.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> --James.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> On 4/14/2017 9:08 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Gale Andrews <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> I think the first order placement is necessary for a repetitive
>>>>>> >> >>>> action
>>>>>> >> >>>> that you want to be fast, rather than having to move both right
>>>>>> >> >>>> and
>>>>>> >> >>>> then down a list of eight items.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> In which case one would also argue for the four pe-existing zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> commands:
>>>>>> >> >>> In, Normal, Out, Selection
>>>>>> >> >>> To be at first order placement.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> I would argue that those pre-existing four are far more
>>>>>> >> >>> important
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> >> >>> these four
>>>>>> >> >>> new pixel-to-fraction-second - the effect of those is certainly
>>>>>> >> >>> simpler to
>>>>>> >> >>> comprehend.
>>>>>> >> >>> And I'm betting that once the new commands are released most
>>>>>> >> >>> users
>>>>>> >> >>> will use
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> pre-existing set a lot more than the new set.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> So I continue therefore to strongly argue for the removal of the
>>>>>> >> >>> second
>>>>>> >> >>> level menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom One Pixel to" - and four the four new commands to be
>>>>>> >> >>> placedin
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom" submenu.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> And I would still prefer to see them in a separate  sub-menu
>>>>>> >> >>> "View>Zoom>One
>>>>>> >> >>> Pixel to"
>>>>>> >> >>> in order to avoid over-lengthening the View>Zoom menu.
>>>>>> >> >>> Especially
>>>>>> >> >>> bearing
>>>>>> >> >>> in mind
>>>>>> >> >>> that we may well want to add more commands to that menu if we
>>>>>> >> >>> end
>>>>>> >> >>> up
>>>>>> >> >>> implementing
>>>>>> >> >>> the extra zoom buttons called for in the Zoom Toolbar proposal
>>>>>> >> >>> for
>>>>>> >> >>> "Zoom
>>>>>> >> >>> Maximum"
>>>>>> >> >>> and "Zoom Preset":
>>>>>> >> >>> http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Proposal_new_Zoom_Toolbar
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Folk that use them a lot and want fast action will normally
>>>>>> >> >>> resort
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >>> setting shortcuts
>>>>>> >> >>> for them anyway - so there is no real need.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> Peter.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> David agreed with my point and
>>>>>> >> >>>> until now, no-one disagreed. There is also the question of
>>>>>> >> >>>> making
>>>>>> >> >>>> a good, non-repetitive wording if the pixel zoom commands were
>>>>>> >> >>>> in zoom.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> And please, no two-submenu depth items in an already short
>>>>>> >> >>>> menu.
>>>>>> >> >>>> That would be even worse - as David said that is against
>>>>>> >> >>>> Microsoft
>>>>>> >> >>>> guidelines.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> There is always a downside to the apparent neatness/orderliness
>>>>>> >> >>>> of short menus when you actually want to use the menu commands.
>>>>>> >> >>>> I would expect we could be fine tuning the menus again when
>>>>>> >> >>>> more
>>>>>> >> >>>> users get to see them and use them.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> Gale
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:45, Peter Sampson
>>>>>> >> >>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Can I ask just why is Davi's new set of zoom to fractions of
>>>>>> seconds
>>>>>> >> >>>>> in the top level of the View Menu as "Zoom One Pixel to" with
>>>>>> >> >>>>> its
>>>>>> >> >>>>> four sub-commands - rather living in View > Zoom as four new
>>>>>> >> >>>>> subcommands there?
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Or even View > Zoom >One Pixel to > ...
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> James worked hard to shorten the menus and now already we
>>>>>> >> >>>>> appear
>>>>>> >> >>>>> to be unnecessarily lengthening them again.
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
12