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

[Feature]: Enable shift + click in journal #786

Open
rhl-bthr opened this issue Feb 26, 2018 · 7 comments
Open

[Feature]: Enable shift + click in journal #786

rhl-bthr opened this issue Feb 26, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@rhl-bthr
Copy link
Contributor

rhl-bthr commented Feb 26, 2018

Proposed Feature:

  1. Open the journal
  2. Click on a checkbox(CellRendererToggle) next to an activity (say, 2nd in line from the top)
  3. Hold shift and click on another checkbox (say, 5th in line from the top)

Observed output:

  1. 2nd gets selected
  2. 5th is not selected (Shift + click is not detected)

Proposed output:
2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th activities should get selected(checked)

Reason for proposal:
This could be helpful when a user wishes to remove a continuous list of activities(say, 10) out of a total of (say. 30). This coincides with the general way of selection using shift key

Finding:

  1. Shiift + click is not detected by toggled signal. It has no other signals available.
  2. A SHIFT Mask check can't be done because of 1.
  3. TreeView Column also didn't give a lead.

Seeking guidance:

  1. Whether this idea should be implemented ?
  2. If yes, what could be a possible area to look into
  3. This should be doable for favorite buttons(since they detect shift+click), but this again depends on 1. and the fact that is it achievable for checkboxes(to ensure consistency) without a cost

Kindly suggest

@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Feb 27, 2018

Yes, shift+click in a Gtk.ListBox would normally extend the selection through a range, but I don't know that it is common for lists that are tables with toggle buttons. In lists, click deselects all others, and ctrl+click toggles an individual entry. To be consistent we would need to bring these as well. It would be a significant change, and would break the click which resumes the entry.

Workflow for deleting journal objects by name or time is to use the selection criteria first, then select one, then press the select all button. Does this work for you?

We have a number of other problems with the journal if you're interested; I've bought a couple over into #788.

@rhl-bthr
Copy link
Contributor Author

An example of the proposed feature in lists would be list of mails in 'gmail', where a click toggles an individual entry, ctrl+click does the same thing, and shift+click does the proposed.

The selection criteria does the work well for me.

I agree that this might not be something we need, considering that we have more pressing issues already.

Thanks for pointing out the other issues. I will try to develop a fix for them

@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Feb 28, 2018

So the proposal is adding shift+click to extend selection through a range, and ctrl+click to toggle an entry. Post to sugar-devel@ with the [DESIGN] subject tag to engage with others. Confine your post to the user interface or user experience dimension of the problem; don't get into implementation details. Ignore any unrelated discussion on the thread that ensues.

For context, this was not a problem before multiple selection feature was added, so it could be seen as an improvement to that feature.

@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Mar 2, 2018

Let's give it a week in the hope of meaningful on-topic replies. If we don't get anything by 7th March, let's go ahead.

@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Mar 3, 2018

No rush. I'm fine with adding this feature before about October. 😁

@saiatl2354
Copy link

Has this feature been implemented yet?

@chimosky
Copy link
Member

chimosky commented Oct 6, 2023

Has this feature been implemented yet?

Seeing as the issue is still open, I'd say it hasn't been implemented.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants