UI: Collapse XYZ Operations in Status Bar #120148

Harley Acheson · 2024-04-01T21:23:10+02:00

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-01 21:23:10 +02:00

Reduce the number of duplicated modal operator keymap entries by just
showing "XYZ Axis" rather than "X X Axis", "Y Y Azis", etc. This allows
more items to be shown on the status bar. Note this only does so if the
keymap contains all of X, Y, & Z.

This does make the display slightly inconsistent, but perhaps it is worth it to show many other operations instead of repeating these over and over again.

During "Move" there is a lot of space taken to show that X constrains to X axis, Y constrains to Y axis, etc:

This is the same amount of space with those items collapsed. It seems to be quickly readable and obvious:

Reduce the number of duplicated modal operator keymap entries by just showing "XYZ Axis" rather than "X X Axis", "Y Y Azis", etc. This allows more items to be shown on the status bar. Note this only does so if the keymap contains all of X, Y, & Z. --- This does make the display slightly inconsistent, but perhaps it is worth it to show many other operations instead of repeating these over and over again. During "Move" there is a lot of space taken to show that X constrains to X axis, Y constrains to Y axis, etc: ![image](/attachments/76da46e6-7b18-475c-914a-5e3bd0af1c48) This is the same amount of space with those items collapsed. It seems to be quickly readable and obvious: ![image](/attachments/333f6bce-603f-4d52-a4cf-8c3c2d766f4a)

image.png

15 KiB

image.png

13 KiB

👍 5 ❤️ 13 🚀 5

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-01 21:23:20 +02:00

556460c4c7 UI Experiment: Collapse XYZ Operations in Status Bar

Experiment in reducing the number of duplicated modal operator keymap
entries. Show just "XYZ Axis" rather than "X X Axis", "Y Y Azis", etc.

Harley Acheson added this to the User Interface project 2024-04-01 21:24:16 +02:00

hamza.SMA commented

2024-04-01 21:57:21 +02:00

First-time contributor

maybe adding "+" between "shift" and the 3 plans will be more clear ?

maybe adding "+" between "shift" and the 3 plans will be more clear ? ![image](/attachments/daf362c3-694f-4fe1-9fe9-4bce580e9a56)

image.png

3.4 KiB

👍 2

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-02 17:34:56 +02:00

maybe adding "+" between "shift" and the 3 plans will be more clear ?

Maybe? When this is seen next to another item, I'm not sure that it explains the difference well:

I'm sure there is some change that would improve this though. This might be it, or it could be something else. Fun to think about though.

> maybe adding "+" between "shift" and the 3 plans will be more clear ? Maybe? When this is seen next to another item, I'm not sure that it explains the difference well: ![image](/attachments/342ca68d-8c0a-4f6f-9e93-d870ab43e1e6) I'm sure there is some change that would improve this though. This might be it, or it could be something else. Fun to think about though.

image.png

9.3 KiB

Harley Acheson referenced this pull request

2024-04-02 18:35:04 +02:00

UI: Status Bar Keymap Spacing #120124

Harley Acheson requested review from Pablo Vazquez 2024-04-02 20:47:50 +02:00

Duarte Farrajota Ramos commented

2024-04-02 23:10:25 +02:00

First-time contributor

Really like how much more compact it is, nice work!

Not to rain on your parade, but we may need some sort of separator between key sequences to be able to distinguish between several mutually exclusive options.

Say tell apart multiple alternatives like ⇧ Shift + X OR ⇧ Shift + Y OR ⇧ Shift + Z), from actual key combinations like Ctrl + ⇧ Shift + Y).

Maybe add a comma between mutually exclusive options, or add a "+" between real combinations like ⇧ Shift + X, Y, Z, or ⇧ Shift + Y

Really like how much more compact it is, nice work! Not to rain on your parade, but we may need some sort of separator between key sequences to be able to distinguish between several mutually exclusive options. Say tell apart multiple alternatives like <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>X</kbd> OR <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>Y</kbd> OR <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>Z</kbd>), from actual key combinations like <kbd>Ctrl</kbd> + <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>Y</kbd>). Maybe add a comma between mutually exclusive options, or add a "+" between real combinations like <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>X</kbd>, <kbd>Y</kbd>, <kbd>Z</kbd>, or <kbd>⇧ Shift</kbd> + <kbd>Y</kbd>

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-03 01:41:46 +02:00

a6dea82d17 Merge branch 'main' of projects.blender.org:blender/blender into StatusBarXYZ

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-03 16:54:49 +02:00

@DuarteRamos

No doubt there is a solution somewhere, but so far not seeing it in + or comma or slashes or line between. The design constraints (event icons are square, and using layout) isn't leaving me with much that looks right.

@DuarteRamos No doubt there is a solution somewhere, but so far not seeing it in + or comma or slashes or line between. The design constraints (event icons are square, and using layout) isn't leaving me with much that looks right.

Duarte Farrajota Ramos commented

2024-04-03 17:07:50 +02:00

First-time contributor

A small line chaining combinations only works acceptably for individual ones, feels weird with multiple options

I'm not sure it communicates the message clearly or is even perceptible

A small line chaining combinations only works acceptably for individual ones, feels weird with multiple options ![image.png](/attachments/7acbb91c-4600-4e42-8634-847248b221ec) I'm not sure it communicates the message clearly or is even perceptible

image.png

14 KiB

hamza.SMA commented

2024-04-04 01:00:58 +02:00

First-time contributor

@Harley for recording ideas

what about this idea ?
basing on this 3 type of icones

first icone: the first key to hold
second icone : are the second and third keys and so on ..
the third icone : what the last key to type.

@Harley for recording ideas ![image](/attachments/3e57892a-765c-4bd2-a497-9887720b661e) what about this idea ? basing on this 3 type of icones ![image](/attachments/a3c551b1-5f69-4c72-afa9-6e9fffc4491f) first icone: the first key to hold second icone : are the second and third keys and so on .. the third icone : what the last key to type.

image.png

3.3 KiB

image.png

799 B

Grigoriy Titaev commented

2024-04-08 18:12:46 +02:00

First-time contributor

Maybe try the arrow:

Maybe try the arrow: ![arrow.png](/attachments/cce87e90-b9d9-4b0d-a1b8-28cf5e210bdb)

arrow.png

6.0 KiB

❤️ 1

Pablo Vazquez commented

2024-04-08 19:27:56 +02:00

The problem with these is that it could also be read as "Shift + all 3 keys at the same time".

We can't group combinations or we will end up like in main:

So the other alternative is to group the alternative keys into a single squared "symbol".

This way we establish the language that each individual squared-symbol is one key that you must press.

Quick mockup ideas to discuss:

main
Bars
Dots
Nothing, bit confusing.
Combining the plus symbol and bars. This establishes the language of "one squared symbol == one key press.

> ![image](/attachments/342ca68d-8c0a-4f6f-9e93-d870ab43e1e6) The problem with these is that it could also be read as "Shift + all 3 keys at the same time". We can't group combinations or we will end up like in `main`: ![main](/attachments/76da46e6-7b18-475c-914a-5e3bd0af1c48) ---- So the other alternative is to group the alternative keys into a single squared "symbol". This way we establish the language that each individual squared-symbol is one key that you must press. Quick mockup ideas to discuss: 1. main 2. Bars 3. Dots 4. Nothing, bit confusing. 5. Combining the plus symbol and bars. This establishes the language of "one squared symbol == one key press. ![grouped symbols](/attachments/86aebe82-e951-47bc-8c9b-5ffa15eea0ac)

image.png

87 KiB

❤️ 1

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-08 19:58:59 +02:00

I have a hard time seeing any options as being combined with "or".

Wondering if it helps to consider the problem more generally. Like if we want to show that "Confirm" is both left-mouse and return key, or that "cancel" can be done with right-mouse or escape key.

Maybe combine them with commas for alternates? And then only use "+" when needing to combine with any following?

[LM], [Ret] Confirm [RM], [Esc] Cancel [X], [Y], [Z] Axis [⇑]+[X], [Y], [Z] Plane [⇑][⭾] Snap Toggle

Unrelated, but one other thing we are missing is how to indicate a double-click of the left mouse button.

Hmmm... our layout is very loose when combining these things together so they don't look very grouped.

I have a hard time seeing any options as being combined with "or". Wondering if it helps to consider the problem more generally. Like if we want to show that "Confirm" is both left-mouse and return key, or that "cancel" can be done with right-mouse or escape key. Maybe combine them with commas for alternates? And then only use "+" when needing to combine with any following? [LM], [Ret] Confirm [RM], [Esc] Cancel [X], [Y], [Z] Axis [⇑]+[X], [Y], [Z] Plane [⇑][⭾] Snap Toggle Unrelated, but one other thing we are missing is how to indicate a double-click of the left mouse button. Hmmm... our layout is very loose when combining these things together so they don't look very grouped. ![image](/attachments/42b4240e-ee94-44da-bef3-59feaf01970f)

image.png

18 KiB

hamza.SMA commented

2024-04-08 20:47:38 +02:00

First-time contributor

my last imagination about "Or"

unfortunately, without dealing with the frame of the icons is difficult for me
this only when there is combinations with Shift or CTRL + another key
how about it ?

my last imagination about "Or" ![image](/attachments/151df90a-7b4b-46bd-bb96-92296d8810b8) ![image](/attachments/05dd7047-d0a1-4ae9-a1b8-f324f5ae6ba1) unfortunately, without dealing with the frame of the icons is difficult for me this only when there is combinations with Shift or CTRL + another key how about it ?

image.png

13 KiB

image.png

2.0 KiB

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-08 20:55:36 +02:00

Can use the literal "or" perhaps

Can use the literal "or" perhaps ![image](/attachments/4d7f92f0-411b-4c79-9a59-30162399f982)

image.png

14 KiB

Pablo Vazquez commented

2024-04-11 18:53:23 +02:00

During "Move" there is a lot of space taken to show that X constrains to X axis, Y constrains to Y axis, etc:

This is the same amount of space with those items collapsed:

Looking at the initial implementation, that's already a huge improvement: it saves space while still being readable. Especially since by looking at the changes it's not that much code for such an improvement.

Are there ways to make it even better? Probably yes, but that'd require more discussion and it'd be a pity if we end up without any improvements at all because of the back and forth looking for a design that's right.

I'd say lets go with this initial implementation and keep it in the back of our heads. The status bar as a whole needs love.

> During "Move" there is a lot of space taken to show that X constrains to X axis, Y constrains to Y axis, etc: > ![image](/attachments/76da46e6-7b18-475c-914a-5e3bd0af1c48) > > This is the same amount of space with those items collapsed: > ![image](/attachments/333f6bce-603f-4d52-a4cf-8c3c2d766f4a) > Looking at the initial implementation, that's already a huge improvement: it saves space while still being readable. Especially since by looking at the changes it's not that much code for such an improvement. Are there ways to make it even better? Probably yes, but that'd require more discussion and it'd be a pity if we end up without any improvements at all because of the back and forth looking for a design that's right. I'd say lets go with this initial implementation and keep it in the back of our heads. The status bar as a whole needs love.

❤️ 1

Harley Acheson added 2 commits 2024-04-11 22:33:05 +02:00

1d244e9433 Merge branch 'main' of projects.blender.org:blender/blender into StatusBarXYZ

985e99ea23 Done in a safer way. Ensures that the keymap includes X,Y,Z

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-11 22:38:01 +02:00

5ca18bd3ba Cleanup and comments

Harley Acheson changed title from ~~UI Experiment: Collapse XYZ Operations in Status Bar~~ to UI: Collapse XYZ Operations in Status Bar

2024-04-11 22:40:09 +02:00

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-11 22:46:09 +02:00

@pablovazquez - Especially since by looking at the changes it's not that much code for such an improvement.

This (initial) implementation was a bit... bare bones. It would have given a bad result if some operators had only a subset of X,Y,Z. I have updated this PR to be smarter and only do this if all three are present. It is still quite small and simple.

I'd say lets go with this initial implementation

I agree and have take the "Experiment" off the title. Although the display of these is technically inconsistent, I still find it instantly readable and obvious. All attempts I have made to remove inconsistency has (so far) only resulted in a display that was actually harder to read quickly. I don't think anyone would actually try pressing X, Y, and Z simultaneously - at least not more than once before figuring it out.

> @pablovazquez - Especially since by looking at the changes it's not that much code for such an improvement. This (initial) implementation was a bit... bare bones. It would have given a bad result if some operators had only a subset of X,Y,Z. I have updated this PR to be smarter and only do this if all three are present. It is still quite small and simple. > I'd say lets go with this initial implementation I agree and have take the "Experiment" off the title. Although the display of these is technically inconsistent, I still find it instantly readable and obvious. All attempts I have made to remove inconsistency has (so far) only resulted in a display that was actually harder to read quickly. I don't think anyone would actually try pressing X, Y, and Z simultaneously - at least not more than once before figuring it out.

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-11 22:59:38 +02:00

c9b05cc407 Simplified a bit.

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-11 23:02:18 +02:00

@brecht

Would love your opinion on this. I can't quite decide if this is hacky or awesome.

@brecht Would love your opinion on this. I can't quite decide if this is hacky or awesome.

Brecht Van Lommel requested changes 2024-04-15 10:50:30 +02:00

Dismissed

Brecht Van Lommel left a comment

The functionality seems fine.

The current implementation is too much of a hack though. It's easy to break with different keymaps. It checks for identifiers first, but then doesn't verify those actually correspond to the same items as the X/Y/Z keys. It doesn't check modifier keys match, duplicates some logic for modifier key drawing, etc.

The functionality seems fine. The current implementation is too much of a hack though. It's easy to break with different keymaps. It checks for identifiers first, but then doesn't verify those actually correspond to the same items as the X/Y/Z keys. It doesn't check modifier keys match, duplicates some logic for modifier key drawing, etc.

source/blender/windowmanager/intern/wm_event_system.cc Outdated

						
				@ -6364,6 +6364,21 @@ bool WM_window_modal_keymap_status_draw(bContext *C, wmWindow *win, uiLayout *la

				  }

				  const EnumPropertyItem *items = static_cast<const EnumPropertyItem *>(keymap->modal_items);

				#ifdef WITH_HEADLESS

Brecht Van Lommel commented

2024-04-15 10:41:39 +02:00

Why WITH_HEADLESS? Seems pointless to have it behave different for that.

Why `WITH_HEADLESS`? Seems pointless to have it behave different for that.

Harley marked this conversation as resolved

Harley Acheson added 2 commits 2024-04-16 02:50:28 +02:00

224f38b632 Merge branch 'main' of projects.blender.org:blender/blender into StatusBarXYZ

5ca614d575 A little less hacky

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-16 03:11:55 +02:00

8fbd08db71 more de-hackifying

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-16 05:20:16 +02:00

cebc1006b6 Ensure each group uses consistent modifiers

Harley Acheson added 1 commit 2024-04-16 05:39:34 +02:00

a1bb0903e7 removing duplication

Harley Acheson commented

2024-04-16 05:41:09 +02:00

@brecht - The current implementation is too much of a hack though...

This PR is now using the correct hotkeys and modifiers even if changed, and checks to make sure that each group (axis or plane) is using consistent modifiers. Still a bit more mess than I'd like though.

> @brecht - The current implementation is too much of a hack though... This PR is now using the correct hotkeys and modifiers even if changed, and checks to make sure that each group (axis or plane) is using consistent modifiers. Still a bit more mess than I'd like though.

Brecht Van Lommel added 1 commit 2024-04-22 16:04:21 +02:00