Multiple View Ports

[optigon]

Wings somewhat supports multiple viewports which is good, but I see room for improvement.

Wondering what others think on this subject.

[oort]

optigon,
I usually only use one viewport but I haven't done much modeling in a long time...

That said, it would be nice if added geometry windows were able to remember the last viewpoint (X,Y,Z, or other) when opening a file at a later date. Currently if I were to create a top, front, or side viewport the next time I open the file all the viewports look the same. Then one might also want to be able to change the names of the added geometry windows/viewports.

Also, the number of geometry windows/viewports that are opened should be file specific and not affect new files created, unless it was a user preference that could be set.

Just a couple of thoughts... it wouldn't be one of my top wants...
oort

[Fonte Boa]

( a ) Ability to Maximize/Restore (to its size in a multiple windows scheme) any additional Geometry window.

( b ) Additional Geometry windows could be more cleaner then main one: it would be conveninent an option to customize this, so that user could optimize the entire screen removing in these additional windows top menu, info line, info display, everything including title bar (why not), keeping Wings philosophy of cleaner work area. Each maximized window could then have the main one characteristics (top menu, info line etc).

( c ) Of course it would be cool if these additional windows could be customized to have its proper scheme of colors, shaders, etc, but without affect the main one geometry window.

[maker]

I think it's nice enough. If anything, I'd like the horizontal scrollbars in the Geom-graph window. So that long names don't create a mess, and I can tuck all non geometry wins to one side.

Besides, oort's suggestion of "remembering" views over sessions would be welcome. But this has become less important with Micheus's View-windows plugin.

And (a) of Font Boa's suggestion would be welcome, too.

[My tastes are simple. I want simply the best .(Preferably free.) ]

[micheus]

The most important thing to me: sincronize the operations (commands) between all geom window - it's not make sense to me the way as it is:
Open two geo; add a cube; start moving a face using RMB; go to the other geom window and you will notice:
- context menu with operations for that item selected;
- we can start any new operation, although it is undone;

If the extra geo windows should be used only for viewing, then I agree with Fonte's request ( b ).

I also agree with Fonte' request ( c ) - mainly about view modes - that I think it would be independent from each other I've reported this in the past.

I also like oort's idea about save the last view pos (for each project) - I related this in the past too.

---

[OT]
Optigon, by considering there is the possiblity to use wxWidgets (wxErlang) in a future (maybe soon) to build the Wings' UI and that library is more powerful than SDL/esdl.
here an example (Symscape's Caedium):

Ok. I know that wxErlang is not ready yet, but do you think it is worthwhile spend time making huge improvements to this window? (by considering that the "power" of wx would be used to improve Wings UI)

[optigon]

WxWidgets is something to consider.

One thing I notice right away with the current setup is the duplication of toolbars, menu bars, and the tweak info lines and statusbar displays. For sure I would want to minimize these elements.

Of course the View menu calls would have to be per port.

With Micheus' additions of the Saved Views and Groups windows, I think docking would be ideal instead of having them all open.

Wx has the shortfall of not supporting right and middle button mouse clicks in menus.

[micheus]

Wx has the shortfall of not supporting right and middle button mouse clicks in menus.

That's a big limitation for Wings.

the Saved Views and Groups windows, I think docking would be ideal instead of having them all open.

with possibility to make it float again?
Docking windows uses to put than in a corner of screen and for work fast (swapping views) is good when it is near to the work area (usually in the middle of screen).

[optigon]

Yep, docking un docking would be good.

Another thing I have been thinking about is the Infoline. After studying several design documents on user interface and experience, I have come to the conclusion that the infoline is badly designed. This is backed up by the continuous requirement to remind and educate new users to it's use. To summarise the design flaw, the Infoline is not where the user is looking since the user will be looking at what is within a 5px radius of their mouse. This is why tooltips in most programs, commonly appear beneath the cursor, because that is where the user is looking.

So what we have so far is:

1. Per project and per window settings + global default
   
2. Docking
   
3. Remove duplication/Cleaner interface
   

It would really simplify matters is the additional viewports were only for viewing, but this could cause a major reduction in workflow possibilities.

[micheus]

This is why tooltips in most programs, commonly appear beneath the cursor, because that is where the user is looking.

It would be a good addition. (when I worked in the Infoline autosize, I tried to implement something like that for menus, but stoped since I knew less from erlang/wings than now [and I still know just a little ])

It would really simplify matters is the additional viewports were only for viewing, but this could cause a major reduction in workflow possibilities.

If the commands were processed in only a place (as a main process - not main geom) and the inputs from geom were sent to it (as we can do in other languages), then the geom management could become easy and independent from each other. (to simplify the idea)


p.s. It should be almost christmas there...
merry christmas, ho ho ho!

edit
in Europe. I forgot you are in Canada

[Fonte Boa]

Clean additional windows UI should not mean to make them just visualization windows: this would reduce dramatically a lot of workflow possibilities. That is why i think this should be optional.
Or the "main" window could ever be the active one: it would be complete (top menu, info and display lines etc) and the other would be cleaner.