Migration of the selection filter to the inspector.

• Sep 12, 2015 - 23:07
Graphical (UI)
S5 - Suggestion

When or measures are selected, it is sometimes necessary to act with the selection filter. Generally the inspector is open (and take up much space) ... and it is virtually empty.
Inspecteur vide.png
But to narrow his choice must open the selection filter which also occupies a large place among the pallets. It is then open, reduce, close, reopen, enlarge, shrink, etc ... the working ergonomics is not ideal.

My request is simple: to minimize the occupied space, the selection filter should it not be a function of the inspector?

Inspecteur sélecteur.png
The inspector already offers a selection option minimalist ... why not extend this possibility.
Of course the selection filter must remain detachable as it is currently in the Palettes window.


I know this possibility but I do not find ergonomic (to the point not to use it because forbidding: open, maximize, minimize, check, uncheck, recheck, etc .... it shocks my Cartesian mind) I do not want have the choice of the selection window or the inspector but two at once.

I like the idea, but I don't use the selection filter a lot myself. Is there anything we would loose if the selection filter was in the inspector when a range of measure is selected? Something that can be done currently with the selection filter that couldn't be done in this case?

As far as I know it is *supposed* to be the case that the selection filter is only meaningful while there is a range selection, although I don't know that there are not some corner cases where it ends up having some effect in other situations.

I could imagine the filter being displayed as part of the inspector only for range selection or no selection. The latter is important, otherwise it could become impossible to make range selections at all if voice 1 is deselected in the filter and you can't get to the filter without making a selection but having voice 1 deselected in the filter makes it impossible to make a range selection.

Perhaps less drastic would be to have the filter always there but collapsed or otherwise disabled if there is a selection other than a range selection.

Either way, it might take some getting used to, but the idea *does* make sense, and it would make the selection filter much more discoverable. So in principle, I do like the idea.

I took a closer look. There are several problems.

1/ Imagine you have a range selection. You go to the inspector, select the dynamics only with checkbox. As soon as only dynamics are selected, the inspector will change into the dynamics inspector... It calls for a button :( I don't really like the idea of a button but ok...

2/ Currently we keep the selection filter, do a range selection containing a dynamic and no way to change the selection filter... since the dynamic inspector will be displayed... We could then forget about the selection filter once it has been applied by the button but I guess use cases relying on the fact that the filter is kept between selection will then be broken...

Very good points. I think I prefer having ther selection filter always there, but still maybe tying it into Inspector at least visually. Not sure what that means.

In my idea, moving the selection filter in the inspector should give an active effect.
In his "free" release (excluding inspector) it allows to select which elements will be involved, but does not select anything himself.
In the Inspector it directly selects the choice made.
Two features for the same functionality according as it is used alone or in combination with the inspector.