nifi-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Gilman <matt.c.gil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Feature proposal: Streamline visual flow design
Date Fri, 13 Nov 2015 18:14:06 GMT
I thought about that when I was writing my previous response. The concern
there is the amount of 'clickable' space across each type of configurable
component (not just processors) and how much precision would be required
depending on the current scale of the canvas. Just don't want to make it
more difficult by providing less real estate to click. But this wouldn't be
a show stopper.

However, we do already have double click mapped to Enter a Processor Group.
So we wouldn't be able to use double click for configuring a Process Group.
Not sure we want to introduce inconsistency in actions across the types of
configurable components.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Mark Petronic <markpetronic@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Right now, when you move your mouse over the processor, that connection
> handle icon appears. If you double click it, nothing really happens. So,
> and this is just my thought, just keep that behavior the same and require
> the double click to be NOT over that icon if you want to open the config
> dialog. That 'seems' pretty natural and not a UX hack. Its like there are
> two layers. Layer one is the processor and layer two is the dragable
> connection handle on top of layer one. A user needs to at least know which
> one of these the double click is targeted against and aim accordingly.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Matt Gilman <matt.c.gilman@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not against the double click idea. However, my only
>> concern/hesitation is around the behavior if the double click happens over
>> the connection handle. A mouse down there initiates the begin of creating a
>> connection by shifting the connection handle around your mouse (dragging
>> thereafter the connection handle moves with your mouse). If we'd continued
>> with this idea we'd likely need to make some changes around this behavior
>> to avoid confusion.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Mark Petronic <markpetronic@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for double-click and open config dialog on processors. Seems most
>>> intuitive to a user.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Andrew Grande <agrande@hortonworks.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I just had the same idea today. Would like to have double-click open
>>>> the Properties pane of a processor, this is the majority of use cases.
>>>>
>>>> I am against making the action customizable, though. This is a case
>>>> where less is more for a UX and provides a consistent experience across all
>>>> deployments (just imaging if someone swapped start/stop and an operator
>>>> expected a Props screen. Oops!)
>>>>
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> From: Charlie Frasure <charliefrasure@gmail.com>
>>>> Reply-To: "users@nifi.apache.org" <users@nifi.apache.org>
>>>> Date: Friday, November 13, 2015 at 9:13 AM
>>>> To: "users@nifi.apache.org" <users@nifi.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Feature proposal: Streamline visual flow design
>>>>
>>>> Apologies, not sure how to properly respond to an old thread.  (Maybe
>>>> that's the idea.)  I was looking through the archives before posting some
>>>> usability comments about the UI and turned up a couple of threads in
>>>> September.
>>>>
>>>> If we did automatically open the configuration screen when a processor
>>>> was dropped on the canvas, a quick press of ESC seems to back out nicely.
>>>> A possible compromise for the processor configuration could be a
>>>> double-click to open behavior, as it seems this action is not currently
>>>> assigned.  Better yet, a user-configurable double click action (start/stop,
>>>> configure, data provenance, etc) would be nice.
>>>>
>>>> The other enhancements mentioned would be great as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rob Moran <rmo...@gmail.com> Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Feature proposal:
>>>> Streamline visual flow design Date Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:09:44 GMT
>>>>
>>>> So far there seems to be a couple in agreement to leave the add processor
>>>> behavior as is. My use of *inconsistency* was referring the simple fact
>>>> that behavior is different. Add a processor - no dialog; draw a connection
>>>> - same type of dialog appears to take action. Perhaps we design a more
>>>> intuitive way to quickly “configure” a connection when drawn. It could
be a
>>>> small in-place editor <http://ui-patterns.com/patterns/InplaceEditor>
that
>>>> appears when the connection is drawn allowing a quick, localized
>>>> configuration to take place.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message