Submitted by Armando on 2010/11/25 14:57
I don't know it that's an unfeasible / unpractical crazy idea... But it seems reasonable to me :-)
 
Would it be nice if we could hoist/unhoist a portion of the properties pane (a form, a section, a parent in the "available fields", etc.)?
It'd provide a way to isolate sections when working on specific fields.
 
Opinions?

Comments

I'll wait for Pierre's input before adding it to Mantis. Want to know if that's wishable/feasible to not overcrowd the DB with stuff.

[bump 2011 02 13 -- 15 58] Need some more feedback if I'm going to add this to mantis...

[just rebumping to keep track as I'm trying to figure out where we're at in terms of suggestions and bud reports...]

I like the idea of applying a form to a grid, that is the fields in the form would be shown in the grid.
 
(but I've got higher priority stuff to do first...)
 

Armando

2011/02/13 16:28

In reply to by Pierre_Admin

I'm not sure if you understood the suggestion -- maybe you did, but you seem to suggest something different (?). I was simply wondering if it could be possible to hoist a portion of the properties pane, or a few selected fields. ---- As for the higher priority stuff : of course! I'm just keeping track of suggestions and store them in Mantis if necessary! This is obviously low priority.

Pierre_Admin

2011/02/13 16:39

In reply to by Armando

Ah ! thanks for adding this. I did get this completely wrong.
 
What I'm planning to do, is to enable having multiple Properties Panes and enable selection of which section is shown in each. As for this Hoist suggestion, let's see what other users think...
 
 

Armando

2011/02/13 19:43

In reply to by Pierre_Admin

Yes, the multiple properties panes is obviously a good idea. I see this "fields hoist" idea like a kind of form creation on the fly. Select a few fields, and hoist... Work with them, then unhoist. Tom an Jan liked the idea too.... However I wonder if the multiple properties pane usage would nullify the need for that kind of functionality. It's different, but...