InfoQube IM - Community

Submitted by Tom on 2017/04/07 10:01

Losing edits:

Edit an item in the Surface tab.

I get a pop-up editbox

Using a combination of Shift+Arrowkey shows a formatting toolbar (Note: I was just trying to select text)

Once this toolbar has appeared - any changes made will be lost if return is pressed (the editbox disappears, edits are lost).

This also the case when editing a new item.

Note 1:

Clicking okay to save changes works, even if the toolbar has shown.

Note 2:

I presume it should work like in the grid where a return will finish editing.

Comments

hi Pierre,

i know you currently have other plans

but I'll post Surface mini-bugs here if I come across them:

An item in Surface will not show much text:

I have an example here where the text at the bottom fades out after less than 30 words (which take up 10 lines).

The only way to see the text is to edit the item.

Note the above with "Auto Size" selected in the context menu.

I can disable that for individual items and resize to show the text.

(YMMV, I would still see the above as a 'mini-bug'.)

I don't know if this is a bug per se, but it's stopped me from using Surface much at all - if I take an outline and add it to Surface, it does not automatically lay itself out across the page in any readable manner (whereas map view works perfectly in this regard). In fact, what shows up in Surface is so disjointed I have to keep looking at the outline to try and figure out where things are supposed to go and have to keep dragging them all over the place to have it end up being remotely readable/followable. As a result I've just stuck with maps.

I'm a bit surprised I've seen no other mention of this. Maybe because other people are building their drawings within surface, whereas I'm adding an outline to surface and expecting it to lay out on the page?

p.s. But keep working on the calendar Pierre

Agreed David,

I've tended to use it for small hierarchies where I want to spread it out and get an overview, then adding or expanding items within Surface.

Vaguely related -- to usability, for me at any rate, is that font size not being adjustable can be hard on the eyes.

> p.s. But keep working on the calendar Pierre !

also agreed !

really looking forward to syncability :-)

[quote=Tom]

Vaguely related -- to usability, for me at any rate, is that font size not being adjustable can be hard on the eyes.

[/quote]

Good point. In v96:

New: Surface: Grow / Shrink font commands are now enabled

Pierre_Admin

IQ Designer

[quote=David_H]

[/quote]

Hi David,

I see this as a good thing that MapView and Surface work in a different manners. They are complementary...

The MapView is an extension of grids, kind of a visual 2-D hoist with automatic positioning of sub-items.

It is dynamic in that it can show any item in the grid. Items do not really have defined positions. Little is saved.

The Surface is a very different, it is view in itself, not related to a grid. IMO, it would get crowded quickly if every item was automatically expanded and positioned as the MapView does.

The idea is that you put items on the surface (or set existing items to show there) and then these can be moved around anywhere on the infinite sheet. Items on the Surface are more permanent and have additional attributes (position, links, link text, link line type, box size etc)

When you expand an item, child items are initially shown as sub-items (below and to the right of the item). You then drag out some of these to put emphasis. Others stay as sub-items.

Having these 2 types of child items (sub-items and those dragged out) is useful since you can set the surface to hide only sub-items when you close the parent item. Hence, hiding non-relevant child items. This is difficult to do with a grid (need to use sub-item specific filters) and impossible with the MapView

HTH !

Pierre_Admin

IQ Designer

I'm with David for that. If I want to play with an already structured hierarchy, I usually don't want to rebuild it.

I understand how map view and surface are different, but if the surface is to inflexible in its flexibility it makes it hard to use it for many things (like working from existing complex parents/children relationships and combine that with heterarchical multidirectional links, not possible in other views).

As for map view, as it is now, it's the reverse problem : too rigid (for me, and compared to other mind mappers).

[quote=Armando]

I'm with David for that. If I want to play with an already structured hierarchy, I usually don't want to rebuild it.

[/quote]

Hi Armando,

Rebuild ? Hierarchy should be perfectly reproduced for items shown on the Surface. No need to rebuild... Plus it supports Ctrl + 1-9, 0 to expand / collapse.

Pierre_Admin

IQ Designer

[quote=Pierre_Admin]

[quote=Armando]

I'm with David for that. If I want to play with an already structured hierarchy, I usually don't want to rebuild it.

[/quote]

Hi Armando,

Rebuild ? Hierarchy should be perfectly reproduced for items shown on the Surface. No need to rebuild... Plus it supports Ctrl + 1-9, 0 to expand / collapse.

Pierre_Admin

IQ Designer

[/quote]

Thanks. I tried to reproduce the behavior I was referring to, but the surface doesn't seem to behave as "expected" here.

- If I check the "surface1" field for items, they sometimes appear on the surface, sometimes not.

- I can't drag/drop items to the surface.

I might be doing something wrong, but I don't have the time to dig into the problem at the moment... So, in any case it's not urgent.

would it be possible to get 'expand / collapse' hotkeys for within Surface ?

(would be *very* flexible then)

[quote=Tom]

would it be possible to get 'expand / collapse' hotkeys for within Surface ?

(would be *very* flexible then)

[/quote]

Ctrl + 1-9 and Ctrl + 0 should work on the Surface. If it doesn't, I know it works in v96, coming to a store near year real soon

Pierre_Admin

IQ Designer

[quote=Pierre_Admin]Ctrl + 1-9 and Ctrl + 0 should work on the Surface. If it doesn't, I know it works in v96, coming to a store near year real soon

[/quote]

Ha ha :D

typical tom:

I requested without actually checking to see if it works!

Does work: will test it properly in version 96 from the store nearby ;-)