Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"Smarter" Spacebar behavior #925

Closed
sinewave opened this issue Jun 8, 2012 · 10 comments
Closed

"Smarter" Spacebar behavior #925

sinewave opened this issue Jun 8, 2012 · 10 comments

Comments

@sinewave
Copy link

sinewave commented Jun 8, 2012

I think it would be really awesome if you could add another option for a "smarter" search bar behavior to the preferences. A lot times i find myself wishing i could combine all the other options instead of having to choose between them. What i would suggest is for the behavior to be context sensitive based on the current selection in the first pane.

For example pressing the spacebar would perform the following actions in order:

folders/files - navigate into folder or file (ie show apps recent documents, txt files contents, etc..)
urls - jump to argument field
files - quickview for any file that you can't typically navigate into

Other definitions could be made for other file types with the default behavior being show contents.

It might sound a little confusing on paper but coming for Launchbar which has a similar behavior it actually feels very intuitive and definitely subscribes to the quicksilver philosophy :)

@philostein
Copy link
Contributor

philostein commented Jun 8, 2012

Why 'jump to…' for URLs?

Edit A. To use 'Open URL With…' instead of 'Open URL'?

Interesting idea overall.

@pjrobertson
Copy link
Member

pjrobertson commented Jun 9, 2012

Neat idea, but it would certainly be difficult to be sure we got the priority right, and it could cause for a lot of confusion.

Here's what I'm playing with right now, however I'm not sure how 'smart' it actually is:

  • invalid search string, switch to text mode when space is pressed
  • else, if you can right arrow into the object move down into it
  • else if you can quick look the item, do that
  • finally, go to the 3rd pane.

The options/order appears limitless so it'll be difficult to define a really smart way of doing things!

@sinewave
Copy link
Author

sinewave commented Jun 9, 2012

@philostein i guess what i meant by urls was more for web search urls (google, amazon, etc..) so that hitting spacebar would jump to the third pane to enter in the search criteria. Not sure if QS distinguishes between urls & search urls?

@pjrobertson that looks awesome and i think the priority looks right on. I imagine it would cover 95% of daily use cases! Any eta on a release date, i would love to start using this

@pjrobertson
Copy link
Member

pjrobertson commented Jun 9, 2012

@pjrobertson that looks awesome and i think the priority looks right on.
I imagine it would cover 95% of daily use cases! Any eta on a release date,
i would love to start using this

I think it's something we'd need to discuss with a wider audience to make
sure we have the priority right, but implementing it can be done in a
matter of seconds :)
As always, the lengthy part is the discussion. It'd help us a lot if you
could create a post in the groups (
http://groups.google.com/group/blacktree-quicksilver/topics?gvc=2 ) to try
and gauge people's interests/thoughts
On 9 June 2012 17:00, sinewave <
reply@reply.github.com

wrote:

@philostein i guess what i meant by urls was more for web search urls
(google, amazon, etc..) so that hitting spacebar would jump to the third
pane to enter in the search criteria. Not sure if QS distinguishes between
urls & search urls?

@pjrobertson that looks awesome and i think the priority looks right on. I
imagine it would cover 95% of daily use cases! Any eta on a release date, i
would love to start using this


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#925 (comment)

@sinewave
Copy link
Author

sinewave commented Jun 9, 2012

I think it's something we'd need to discuss with a wider audience to make
sure we have the priority right, but implementing it can be done in a
matter of seconds :)

If its that easy to make the change can you pls implement as an option. There are already 6 different spacebar options so 1 more shouldn't bother anyone :) And i really think it will go over well once you get used to it.

As always, the lengthy part is the discussion. It'd help us a lot if you
could create a post in the groups (
http://groups.google.com/group/blacktree-quicksilver/topics?gvc=2 ) to try
and gauge people's interests/thoughts

Ok will do, although im afraid with a option like this you might get 10 different opinions from 10 responses.

@HenningJ
Copy link
Contributor

HenningJ commented Jun 10, 2012

Ok will do, although im afraid with a option like this you might get 10 different opinions from 10 responses.

Sure. But many of them will contain useful ideas or at least things to think about. Combining the best ideas will yield the best implementation. :-)

@iaj
Copy link

iaj commented Jun 27, 2012

Since QS ran sluggishly for me a while back (especially after running for a while) I gave Launchbar a try and I must second the thread creator, that it's just awesome using Space all the time by intelligently figuring out the context.

So for example, if the second pane is focused, there's no way Space will ever work if set to drill down into folder/contents, so it could as well focus the third pane, couldn't it?

And if there's no way to drill down / show last used items Quicklook would be the best solution then I guess.

@sinewave
Copy link
Author

sinewave commented Oct 7, 2012

Hey guys, any chance of this making it's way into a release sometime in the near future?

@skurfer
Copy link
Member

skurfer commented Oct 8, 2012

I don't think we've established what “this” is. For instance, I’m completely opposed to the second bullet point on @pjrobertson’s list above …or at least, I’m opposed to it appearing before Quick Look in the list. Perhaps if the second and third things on the list were reversed, we’d have a good starting point. I don’t know if it’s quite as easy as Patrick made it sound, but I won’t be working on it so he’ll have to provide an ETA. :-)

@skurfer
Copy link
Member

skurfer commented May 19, 2016

This was implemented in #1803 and #2072

@skurfer skurfer closed this as completed May 19, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants