[Engine-devel] custom properties sheet feature page
Einav Cohen
ecohen at redhat.com
Fri May 18 09:35:34 UTC 2012
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik at redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 12:25:45 PM
>
> inline
>
> Thanks,
> Gilad.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen at redhat.com>
> > To: "David Jaša" <djasa at redhat.com>, "Miki Kenneth"
> > <mkenneth at redhat.com>, "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow at redhat.com>,
> > "Simon Grinberg" <sgrinber at redhat.com>, "Eldan Hildesheim"
> > <ehildesh at redhat.com>, "Eldan Hildesheim"
> > <info at eldanet.com>, "Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik at redhat.com>
> > Cc: engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 12:12:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] custom properties sheet feature page
> >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "David Jaša" <djasa at redhat.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 11:33:44 AM
> > >
> > > Einav Cohen píše v Čt 17. 05. 2012 v 10:14 -0400:
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "David Jaša" <djasa at redhat.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:44:10 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > Einav Cohen píše v Čt 17. 05. 2012 v 09:30 -0400:
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "David Jaša" <djasa at redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:40:19 PM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Einav Cohen píše v Čt 17. 05. 2012 v 08:10 -0400:
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please review/comment on the Custom Properties Sheet
> > > > > > > > feature
> > > > > > > > page:
> > > > > > > > http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/CustomPropertiesSheet
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just my $0.02:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The table could have always empty row at the bottom,
> > > > > > > eliminating
> > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > all [+] buttons and saving user one needless click:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [-]
> > > > > > > [ "please select a key..." |v]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The [+] buttons at first and second rows would allow user
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > insert a
> > > > > > > row at specified location to make easy custom sorting of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > properties
> > > > > > > (not applicable if properties are auto-sorted, in that
> > > > > > > case,
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > [+]
> > > > > > > buttons can be actually removed).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the input, David. This is an interesting idea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Indeed, when choosing a key in the last row, we can
> > > > > > automatically
> > > > > > add a new "please select a key..." row, which actually
> > > > > > saves
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > user a button-click for adding a new row.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the other hand, from graphic-design point of view, it
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > look
> > > > > > more consistent and "pretty" if:
> > > > > > - The "please select a key..." row won't be displayed
> > > > > > (unless,
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > course, the user explicitly chose to add another row)
> > > > > > - All (full) rows will have both [+] and [-] buttons next
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > them
> > >
> > > I should have probably elaborated more on this. To me, UI with
> > > less
> > > elements looks cleaner and prettier even when one of them stands
> > > out.
> > > There's also nothing wrong with standing out if the element has
> > > "special" meaning (one add vs bunch of modify).
> > >
> > > Specifically, this looks cleaner to my eyes:
> > >
> > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [-]
> > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [-]
> > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [-]
> > > [ "Please select a key..." |v]
> > >
> > > than
> > >
> > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Note that in your suggestion above, you cannot insert a new key in
> > between existing keys - only at the end; so
> > although "cleaner", it has less functionality (depends also on the
> > sorting, which is another issue; if there is auto-sorting, it
> > doesn't matter).
> > It is also a matter of taste, I guess, so no absolute right or
> > wrong
> > here IMO.
> > [Others - you are welcome to comment as well]
>
> +1
>
> another tiny comment:
> can the empty line contain all the fields from initial state
> [["please select a key..."][field(empty)][+][-]]
> instead of showing them only after selecting a key.
> [["please select a key..."]]
>
> both of these scenarios are liable,
> I can select a key, regret (change back to [please select a key]) and
> the field and buttons are still visible.
>
> so for the sake of complexity, I prefer to have only one.
* Note that the field input control type (text-box, drop-down) depends on the key anyway (more accurately, on the validation regular expression of the key), so what are you going to show in case of "please select a key..."?
* Need to make sure that validation fails in case field value is not empty and key is "please select a key...".
Due to both of these reasons, I prefer to not show an input control at all in this case.
* No problem of having a "+" button there; however, need to make sure that in case there is only one row in the sheet and it is with "please select a key...", the "-" button should be either hidden or disabled (or non-responsive), since we can't remove the last row.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If the [+] button in my proposal is just greyed out instead
> > > > > of
> > > > > ommited,
> > > > > it could satisfy both requirements.
> > > >
> > > > Almost; the "please select a key..." row is still always
> > > > displayed;
> > > > question is if we want to save a button-click (your suggestion)
> > > > or
> > > > to have a "cleaner" sheet (my suggestion).
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i.e., instead of your suggestion, which looks like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [-]
> > > > > > [ "please select a key..." |v]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it will be "prettier" like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and only if clicking on [+], it will be:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ key1 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key2 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ key3 |v] [ value ] [+] [-]
> > > > > > [ "please select a key..." |v]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that auto-sorting can be confusing, as it can
> > > > > > result
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > rows "jumping" up and down whenever changing the
> > > > > > selection(s)
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > the Key drop-down(s),
> > > > >
> > > > > this could be sort of mitigated by sorting server-side upon
> > > > > modification.
> > > > >
> > > > > > therefore I don't think it is a good idea to implement it
> > > > > > here.
> > > > >
> > > > > OTOH if we're to be manual sorting friendly, we should allow
> > > > > rearranging
> > > > > of the rows by drag & drop or by some sort of move up/down
> > > > > buttons
> > > > > and
> > > > > the dialog would start to be cluttered.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't really like either of these but auto-sort is slightly
> > > > > better
> > > > > IMO
> > > > > as it is kept consistent accross various VMs without user
> > > > > interaction.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed, auto-sort will keep the order consistent across all
> > > > VMs.
> > > > However, maybe the user would like to see the properties in the
> > > > order in which he filled them; in this case, your suggestion of
> > > > "move up/down buttons" is probably relevant here.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that the majority of use-cases won't require more
> > > > than
> > > > 2
> > > > or 3 custom properties per VM, so sorting won't be that
> > > > critical,
> > > > therefore I assume we can start without it; I will add
> > > > "sorting"
> > > > to the "open issues" section in the wiki page.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That seems as more argument in favor of auto sorting.
> >
> > Or no sorting at all (i.e. simply display in order of filling)...
> > In any case, open issue has been added to the wiki.
> >
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > David
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > David
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Einav
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > David Jaša, RHCE
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > SPICE QE based in Brno
> > > > > > > GPG Key: 22C33E24
> > > > > > > Fingerprint: 513A 060B D1B4 2A72 7F0D 0278 B125 CD00 22C3
> > > > > > > 3E24
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > David Jaša, RHCE
> > > > >
> > > > > SPICE QE based in Brno
> > > > > GPG Key: 22C33E24
> > > > > Fingerprint: 513A 060B D1B4 2A72 7F0D 0278 B125 CD00 22C3
> > > > > 3E24
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > David Jaša, RHCE
> > >
> > > SPICE QE based in Brno
> > > GPG Key: 22C33E24
> > > Fingerprint: 513A 060B D1B4 2A72 7F0D 0278 B125 CD00 22C3 3E24
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
More information about the Devel
mailing list