IR8.01 Beta posted

[mathdon]

How about just "Sequence" without any prefacing modifier?

"Short Sequence"
"Long Sequence"
"Macro Sequence"

etc.

I've already said, in my post of about 8 hours ago, that I will revert to what was previously there, with the exception of changing Bound to Target. The lists in an LKP are neither lists of short or long keys, neither are they short or long sequences. The short sequence may be longer than the long sequence! They are keys, sequences, commands or whatever that are sent on short or long keypresses. But they are going back to being labelled "Short Keys" and "Long Keys" because that is what they were, and it is clearly impossible to get a consensus on changing them.
________________
Graham

[mathdon]

Thanks Graham, I hope you're still having fun doing this!

I wouldn't still be doing it if I wasn't!

Ok, but do you have any hair left?

Not a lot, after the past few days!
_____________
Graham

[Capn Trips]

How about just "Sequence" without any prefacing modifier?

"Short Sequence"
"Long Sequence"
"Macro Sequence"

etc.

I've already said, in my post of about 8 hours ago, that I will revert to what was previously there, with the exception of changing Bound to Target. The lists in an LKP are neither lists of short or long keys, neither are they short or long sequences. The short sequence may be longer than the long sequence! They are keys, sequences, commands or whatever that are sent on short or long keypresses. But they are going back to being labelled "Short Keys" and "Long Keys" because that is what they were, and it is clearly impossible to get a consensus on changing them.
________________
Graham

Anyone who is interested in USEFUL information or inputs, need not read any further. All that follows is just babbling.

I agree that without a consensus, leave it alone, although the anally-retentive nuclear engineer in me cannot allow a logical inconsistency in your discussion above to pass.

You state that the term "Short sequence" vs. "Long sequence" suggests that one sequence is necessarily shorter than the other, which they need not necessarily be. I could argue your assertion but regardless, the existing formulation "short keys" vs. "long keys" incorrectly suggests a similar relationship. To be absolutely clear to the user, you'd have to have it display something that stipulates that "short" and "long" refer NOT to the data in the box below, but to the duration of the keypreess of the "Target Key" which will invoke what follows: e.g. "Sequence of functions, commands, and/or buttons to be executed upon a short keypress of the target key" vice "Short Keys".

That's probably an impractical solution, so your unassailable logic about lack of consensus prevails.

[Mark Pierson]

But they are going back to being labelled "Short Keys" and "Long Keys" because that is what they were

For LKP/DKP macros (that is essentially what they are) there's obviously not enought real estate on the screen for a verbose description. Would something like "Short Press"/"Long Press" and "Single Press"/"Double Press" labels make more sense without causing the semantics issue?

[mathdon]

You state that the term "Short sequence" vs. "Long sequence" suggests that one sequence is necessarily shorter than the other, which they need not necessarily be. I could argue your assertion but regardless, the existing formulation "short keys" vs. "long keys" incorrectly suggests a similar relationship.

I know, I know! If you look at my earlier post you will see that I called the existing descriptions "Short Keys" and "Long Keys" meaningless. But I am not responsible for them. I felt that "Short Key Commands" and "Long Key Commands" (which is what is in the Release Candidate) went some way towards a meaningful description but have been howled down. Mark's suggestion of Short Press/Long Press does likewise. But this has become a can of worms, or possibly even a Pandora's Box, so I intend to go back to the description, albeit meaningless, for which I cannot be held responsible.
__________________
Graham

[Mark Pierson]

I intend to go back to the description, albeit meaningless, for which I cannot be held responsible.

You could leave them blank and let the user specify whatever label they want!

j/k of course... just trying to keep Graham from becoming disillusioned.

[Capn Trips]

Upon further reflection, I think that "Short Keys" and "Long Keys" is PERFECT! Well Done Graham!

(Just felt a need to provide Graham a little bit of moral support )

[mathdon]

IR 8.01 Release Candidate 2 posted

I have now posted IR 8.01 Release Candidate 2. I hope this will put the lid back on Pandora's Box. The only changes from the first RC are the headings, which I hope are now sanitized to a point acceptable to all. There is no mention of Commands. I've kept Target instead of Bound as this seems relatively uncontroversial. After further reflection I've adopted Mark's suggestion of Short/Long Press and Single/Double Press for the LKP and DKP Macros rather than keeping the meaningless ones with the word "Keys". Surely this can't be controversial. Can it??? Well, I'm sure I'll know soon if it is! (Capn, you were joking, weren't you? )

I'm trying to press on towards a release of 8.01. This one announces itself as 8.01 rather than as 8.01 RC2, so that it can be released without a rebuild. If a further RC version is required, this one can be identified by right-clicking the file and selecting Properties/Details, where the File Version is 8.0.1.8.

Rob, I hope JP1 isn't spoiling your holiday too much! When you are back, perhaps you can judge whether this is ready for a general release.
_____________
Graham

[The Robman]

I might try downloading it a little later and take a look. The holiday's going great. We found an unprotected wifi signal that we're hitching a ride on, which is how come I can get online. I just check the forums when I'm having breakfast, etc.

[mdavej]

Graham,

I just took a quick look. I know you're not happy with the terminology, but I think the small changes you made are a good compromise between keeping the legacy terms and improving ones that just didn't make any sense at all. I don't mean to be a PITA, but I have one other comment related to that. "Source Device" is on the Key Moves summary but not on the popup. For clarity/consistency should "Device" change to "Source Device" in the Function to Perform group, or something like that just to tie the two views together?

This is the first time I've tried the move/sort with undo/redo. Works beautifully and is a great addition. How many levels of undo do you save?

I had one comment about highlighting. When it's disabled, you hide all the Color columns and the tool. You disable the Highlight controls on the popups. Should those be hidden instead of disabled, or does that leave blank space on the popups that would look strange?

Lastly, for something you probably haven't ever touched at all, but something I just happened to notice. When you pick File -> Summary, the details don't always line up with the column headers in each section. They appear to be tab delimited, but some rows have more tabs than they should, so everything doesn't quite line up. I know if the data is too wide, it'll get pushed out with extra tabs, but even short data isn't quite right. Maybe it looks for the widest data and adds tabs for the worst case. If that's difficult to improve, please forget I mentioned it. It's definitely not very important.

Nice work as always. You need to contract yourself out to logitech and write some decent remote software for them now

[mathdon]

Hi, mdavej

Many thanks for those comments.

"Source Device" is on the Key Moves summary but not on the popup. For clarity/consistency should "Device" change to "Source Device" in the Function to Perform group, or something like that just to tie the two views together?

I actually prefer my previous heading of "Function Source" instead of "Source Device" as I thought that tied the two together, but I changed it back to "Source Device" as I felt the absence of the word "Device" might cause unrest.

There is no problem about hiding "Set Color" on the popup menus, the space just closes up. I felt that disabling was appropriate as popups are not "in your face", they only appear when you ask for them, and having it visible but disabled indicates that there is some facility turned off that may be of interest. But I have no strong feelings about it.

At last someone's tried move/sort with undo/redo! I was feeling it hadn't been noticed. There are 8 levels of undo, and you can redo them all provided you haven't edited anything in between. Undo can even cope with edits, additions and deletions - it behaves (I hope!) as if you had performed the edit, addition or deletion on the original (ie undone) grid.

I have looked at the column alignments on File/Summary and thought I had them OK, though not perfect. There are oddities in the way it behaves, though, that I don't understand and probably can't control. But I'll have another look.

Views, anyone, on Function Source v. Source Device or the other points mdavej has raised?
_________________
Graham

[mdavej]

I think leaving Set Color in the menus is fine - a little hint of another feature, as you say. I was actually referring to the entire Highlight frame in each window for editing key moves, macros, etc. Should you hide everything in that frame rather than just disable? I don't have strong feelings one way or the other either. But since the color column is hidden, may as well hide everything else related to highlighting was my thinking, eliminating any head scratching as to why it's there but is inaccessible.

[Capn Trips]

To me, "Functions Source" and "Source Device" are equally imperfect, yet I have no better suggestions, and the last thing we need at this point is more suggestions - unless such a suggestion is CLEARLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY superior.



It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
Sir Winston Churchill
British politician (1874 - 1965)

[Capn Trips]

Oh, by the way, I have noticed that the saved IR file does not remember the highlight color settings. Is it too hard to have IR do this?

[mathdon]

Mdavej, it occurred to me too late that perhaps you meant the entire editing frame. Hiding the Highlight frame there would cause an empty space, and I don't think it is worth the effort to try to dynamically shrink the window to remove it. The same applies, though to a lesser extent. as with the right-click menus, that it is not "in your face". You only see it when editing etc.

Capn, it is deliberate that highlight colors are not saved. I regard them as a temporary tool for use during a single session. It says this in the FAQ. Again, I don't think it would be worth the effort to save them. If they were saved, I would also have to introduce means to delete them, altogether or for a single panel. Even more effort.

OK?

BTW, anyone notice that I'm a Brit but used the US spelling for Color? I don't think my life would still be worth living if I had put in a "Colour" column!
________________
Graham