I wish my AceEdit displaying all the uppermost classes and functions collapsed when the source code is loaded (or a "collapse all" button was pressed).
I think i missed somewhat, shouldn't it be easy?
Currently ace only provides options to foldAll and foldOther
if foldAll hides too much you can use
editor.session.foldAll();
editor.session.unfold([...Array of ranges to not hide]);
If that doesn't work for you and you think this is a common functionality in other editors you can create an issue here
Related
From what I understand this isn't possible out of the box with mmenu or any plugin for it. What I need is an easy way to format the submenus so that they are clickable and collapse/expand, as is clear in the screenshot below. If I'm wrong on this and there are any examples of a plugin/css that will easily do this I'd love to know.
I've discovered that this is indeed possible, simply by adding the class "Vertical" to any child elements.
I'm trying to create a setup where I have multiple textfields/textarea's that are editable but I want the toolbar of the kendoEditor on a fixed place and not floating above the textarea's. Is this possible?
You can use the so called inline editing mode. Check it out here. It is pretty cool imo :)
I'm rebuilding a language selection interface for a multi-national website, and I'm beginning to think it might be better for usability to use a simple form drop down rather than the custom JavaScript drop down menu that they're currently using. Am I way off base here, or should I go with my instinct? What do you think?
Simple drop down has its advantages. When you let the browser decide what to do, instead of forcing it to do what you want via JS, then browsers for unique circumstances (such as mobile devices) will format the drop down as its native selector.
If the custom js menu provides no additional functionality then definitely go with the basic select menu. However, if there's a good reason to use the custom menu, consider implementing it in a way that uses progressive enhancement so you can be sure it provides the basic functionality for everyone and adds features for browsers that can support it.
Any user who reaches the page for setting languages, comes with a specific aim in mind. He already knows what language he wants to set here (just as in most forms people know what they want to fill in for their birth date).
For this reason, I would recommend a text box with autocomplete functionality. Here are the advantages:
a text-box with a type-ahead works much better than a dropdown in most cases when the user knows what his options are
a dropdown with searching for "R" functionality doesn't always work the same way for all browsers, and not all browsers implement searching for "RUS...." and beyond.
from a purely is-this-usable standpoint, the type-ahead will prove to be far more useful over time.
I wouldn't use a drop down for countries - they are cumbersome to use when the number of items are large (https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/31738/what-is-the-maximum-recommended-number-of-item-to-put-in-a-drop-down-list).
The "start typing a letter" to jump directly to say Russia when pressing R is a great feature in drop down lists - although I suspect that this is a power user feature - one that a lot of users will be unaware of (basically because it's a hidden feature).
Check out this solution instead -
http://uxdesign.smashingmagazine.com/2011/11/10/redesigning-the-country-selector/
Cheers
I am thinking of implementing a ribbon GUI in one of my apps and of course want to adhere to the MS Guidelines so it feels like a normal ribbon, etc. But I'm trying to figure out how to solve a specific problem in dynamically changing the ribbon.
I'm creating a concept game editor, please no question on why a ribbon as this is purely a concept idea, but the application will have many editors (2D, 3D, Code, etc) and for each one the GUI should adapt and display relevant controls i.e. in the 2D editor maybe a paintbrush, on the 3D many pan and rotate tools.
Given the ribbon guidelines it makes sense to the Home menu to contain the most common tools, but only for the type of object being edited (rotate makes no sense for 2D or Code!).
I initially thought it could have one window per editor but this makes a real mess and I'd rather have lots of tabbed editors so you can flick through them fast like in eclipse etc. Also all editors save back into one file so it makes sense to have one application window to keep this metaphor for the user.
I was thinking I could dynamically change the ribbon tabs depending on what type of editor the user had open (tabs may appear/disappear, content on the Home tab etc would change) but then this breaks the MS guidelines of:
"Controls displayed in a group MUST NOT change as a result of selection. If a control is not active, then the control MUST be grayed out, rather than removed from the group"
"The tab selected on the Ribbon MUST NOT automatically switch as a result of user selections made in the 177 document (except as noted in the Contextual Tabs section)."
I understand the reasoning behind the guidelines but im not really sure how to get the ribbon to feel right in this situation:
Change the content of the tabs
depending on editor type (goes
against the guidelines)
Have a tab
per editor type (but what if i end up
with 15 editor types!)
Have a very
generic ribbon and move specific
editor operations to a side bar or
something (not the best GUI design)
Use contextual tabs for each type of
editor (better solution but means you
always have one contextual tab open!)
Any other ideas/solutions would be greatly appreciated as I must use a ribbon and must use it for this type of application!
If you are providing a tab that is editor-specific, I suppose you could lay it out in the way that is best for that particular editor. That means that controls are going to move around occasionally, if you use the same tab for the other editors. It doesn't seem practical to gray out the controls that don't apply to any particular editor, if it's going to cause a lot of clutter.
On the other hand, graying out controls does have the benefit of keeping each control in exactly the same physical place on the tab. Do not underestimate the power of this. There's nothing more aggravating than expecting a control one place, and having it suddenly move someplace else (or disappear altogether). The graying out is a clear indication that the grayed control does not apply in this context.
So depending on how different the controls are for each editor, you will have to decide which approach is less disruptive: to gray out the unneeded controls, or to provide a fresh layout for each editor.
It doesn't seem workable to open a tab for every editor that's open, since there will be many tabs that are useless when the user is in a specific editor.
If possible, enlist the help of some volunteers or beta testers, and do some paper prototyping with them to see which approach resonates better with them.
I'm facing the same design problem. One idea is to use different frame for each editor and a different specialized ribbon in it. Because there's little point in a big ribbon with 10 tabs full of disabled commands.
P.S. I'm investigating another idea - to use certain tabs clicks for triggering different editor modes. (I'm designing a house drafting program.) In example:
Clicking "Home" tab switches to the
plan editor to the edit the house
from "top" view;
Clicking "Wall"
tab switches to the wall editor
where you can edit the wall shape
and featues.
Clicking on other tabs
may not change the current editor.
They can show up other non-modal
commands that are related to the
whole document (or something else),
not about the current editor mode
itself.
I am designing an installer interface for a already written program. It is my first windows.form. I see three approaches to solving my "problem" of needing multiple "screens". I can add all the labels/buttons/interface, and then hide/show them at events. Or I can close and open a new windows? Or do I somehow load my next form into the window frame (sortv like an iFrame approach)? Can somehow help explain how to do this?
Thanks!
Though there is nothing stopping you from using any of the approaches that you mentioned,
using separate windows and opening/closing them would be cleaner. If the code for individual windows gets complicated it would be clearer if they were separate.
Since you said you are doing installer's particulary take a look at Wix. It was meant to be used for creating installer's. It has it's own approach of building UI from XML's.
I would design my "screens" as unique frames with each frame having the controls it needed. Then I would just swap them in and out of the main window.
Its sort of like an IFrame (visually at least).
I agree that WiX is worth a look. An alternative to WiX that some people like more (it's just different, some people like one approach, some like the other) is NSIS.
When I have a requirement that calls for swapping out the controls in a single window, I tend to create a user control for each "page".
Have you considered using The Panel control? You can group certain controls together and have them placed inside one or more Panels.
You could Hide/Show each panel when required.