Created attachment 139704 [details] 2021-06-28 - DigiKam 'Tags' screen shot Hi, When working with Tags in digikam, the 'Search' field is located right at the bottom of the screen in the "Tags" tab on the left hand side and also in the "Captions > Tags" tab on the right hand side. (Please see attachment) 1. Would it be possible, in a future release, to move the 'Search' field to the top of the tabs where it will be more obvious and more convenient to use please? 2. It would also speed up my workflow when adding many, many tags to individual photos if the 'Enter/Return' key Applied the changes rather than having to mouse click on the 'Apply' button, (also way down at the bottom of the screen) thanks. 3. Could the 'highlight' colour in the Search box be modified so that the 'Delete' button '<X' is not obscured by the highlight colour? Kind regards Peter J SOFTWARE/OS VERSIONS: DigiKam v7.2.0 MacOS Catalina 10.15.7
Personally, I don't find the search/filter field in the right sidebar from Tags to the top so ideal, because we already have a similar input line here for creating/applying tags, which could lead to confusion. Maik
Any confusion could be avoided with clear labelling. :-) Peter Maik Qualmann wrote on 28/06/2021 16:53:53: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=439241 > > Maik Qualmann <metzpinguin@gmail.com> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |metzpinguin@gmail.com > > --- Comment #1 from Maik Qualmann <metzpinguin@gmail.com> --- > Personally, I don't find the search/filter field in the right sidebar from Tags > to the top so ideal, because we already have a similar input line here for > creating/applying tags, which could lead to confusion. > > Maik >
I've been looking into issue number 3: 3. Could the 'highlight' colour in the Search box be modified so that the 'Delete' button '<X' is not obscured by the highlight colour? And it seems that the red and green colors are hardcoded, and don't take into account dark colour schemes. So I've been working on a patch to make the SearchTextBar widget adjust the colors for dark modes. Ideally the colours should come from the loaded colour scheme file so the user can tweak them, but that's not straightforward at the moment due to the way colour scheme handling is implemented. For now, I'm experimenting with detecting dark/light color schemes but hardcoding these colors: Breeze (light) View/NegativeBackground 55, 27, 37 dark red View/PositiveBackground 26, 52, 26 dark green Breeze Dark View/NegativeBackground 249, 233, 234 light red View/PositiveBackground 212, 250, 226 light green I've attached a montage of screen grabs illustrating how this looks with various color schemes. These are on Linux with Breeze icon theme. Sorry, I don't have access to a Mac to see what that looks like. Notice also that the delete icon is now clearly visible in all schemes. Any thoughts before I continue and submit a merge request? David
Created attachment 141325 [details] Montage of SearchTextBar with different colour schemes
To recognize whether a light or dark icon theme needs to be set, I used this code. It works with all color schemes that digiKam uses. https://invent.kde.org/graphics/digikam/-/blob/master/core/app/main/digikamapp_config.cpp#L105 Maik
Yes, I used that code, with a slight change, using QColor's lightness() method, just to save a few lines.
*** Bug 472094 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Git commit 281afe3ce6685a8756325acdaef28fdb875c9d1c by Maik Qualmann. Committed on 09/07/2023 at 08:43. Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'. adjust visibility of the clear icon in the search text bar Related: bug 472094 FIXED-IN: 8.2.0 M +1 -1 NEWS M +2 -2 core/libs/widgets/text/searchtextbar.cpp https://invent.kde.org/graphics/digikam/-/commit/281afe3ce6685a8756325acdaef28fdb875c9d1c
@Peterj, digikam 8.2.0 pre-release have been rebuilt using last Qt 5.15.11 + KDE 5.110 frameworks. Installer is available at usual place : https://files.kde.org/digikam/ Can reproduce the problem with this version? Thanks in advance Gilles Caulier