Bug 140743 - more flexible and consistent grouping of icons
Summary: more flexible and consistent grouping of icons
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Usability-Themes (show other bugs)
Version: 0.9.0
Platform: unspecified Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-01-27 23:57 UTC by Christian Schaarschmidt
Modified: 2017-08-03 20:35 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 4.3.0


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Christian Schaarschmidt 2007-01-27 23:57:40 UTC
Version:           0.9.0-beta3 (using KDE 3.5.5, Debian Package 4:3.5.5a.dfsg.1-2 (testing/unstable))
Compiler:          Target: i486-linux-gnu
OS:                Linux (i686) release 2.6.18.3

I find the use of the tree on the left side a bit confusing

- Tag View: selecting a node shows pictures for node + subtree; grouped by album
- Date View: selecting year shows nothing, month has to be selected on by one; grouped by album
- Album View: Node shows only node, not subtree; no grouping

Wish:
- allow multiple selections, e.g. Februray2005 _and_ August2006
- add group-by to View-Menu (DE: Ansicht)
  none, default, byTag, byAlbum, byMonth, byYear
- none = no grouping at all (Bug 134389)
- default = the grouping should be done within same context:
  in TagView, by Tags; in DateView byMonth; in AlbumView byAlbum
- option to decide how to group:
  only by child of selected node or by leafs from selected subtree
- option to decide what to show when selecting a node (including root node):
  show complete subtree or only selected node (related to Bug 138200)
Comment 1 Christian Schaarschmidt 2007-01-28 00:00:26 UTC
*** Bug 140732 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Christian Schaarschmidt 2007-01-28 00:09:03 UTC
correction: no grouping is related to Bug 116606, not Bug 134389

I did not add this to Bug 116606, because this is not only about tag-view
Comment 3 Frank Siegert 2007-04-17 14:47:19 UTC
*** Bug 144338 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 S. Burmeister 2007-04-17 15:48:38 UTC
Currently the grouping is only done in the right-pane, i.e. the album-title as a heading for the group of pictures. It would be nice, if the grouping would also happen in the left-pane, e.g. when grouped by album in date-view:

2007
-January
--album1
--album2
--album3

In album-view and order ba date
Album
-2007
--January

In the latter case it might be sensible to only have

Album
-2007 January
-2007 May

And only use further sub-categorisation if there would be more than x sub-categories.
Comment 5 Thomas McGuire 2007-08-17 01:35:19 UTC
I totally agree with Christian's proposal here, it really makes sense.
With this, the usability would be much clearer. Additonally, this would optionally get rid of the annoying album separators.
Most important for me is the "Group by" proposal here.
Comment 6 caulier.gilles 2008-01-30 07:53:07 UTC
SVN commit 768470 by cgilles:

digiKam from KDE3 branch : Calendar View : When selecting Year album now show all pictures 
taken during this year.

BUG: 144337
CCBUGS: 140743
CCBUGS: 126871



 M  +28 -6     digikam/album.cpp  
 M  +13 -2     digikam/album.h  
 M  +59 -16    digikam/albummanager.cpp  
 M  +44 -52    digikam/datefolderview.cpp  
 M  +3 -3      digikam/datefolderview.h  
 M  +13 -11    kioslave/digikamdates.cpp  


WebSVN link: http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=768470
Comment 7 caulier.gilles 2008-01-31 07:31:22 UTC
SVN commit 768997 by cgilles:

digiKam from trunk : backport commit #768470 from KDE3 branch.
CCBUGS: 144337
CCBUGS: 140743
CCBUGS: 126871


 M  +41 -47    datefolderview.cpp  
 M  +3 -3      datefolderview.h  


WebSVN link: http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=768997
Comment 8 caulier.gilles 2011-12-16 11:44:15 UTC
Christian,

This file still valid using digiKam 2.4 ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 9 caulier.gilles 2014-08-30 17:23:25 UTC
Most of wishes are solved since a long time in this file.

For more request please open new one file by wish please, not all requests in one file. It's very complicated to manage.

Gilles Caulier