Re: [Audacity-quality] Mixer Board documentation {was:Visibility of sync-lock mini-clock icon in Track Control Panel}

[Vaughan J. <va...@au...>]

On 10/25/2010 9:56 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> 
>> From Vaughan Johnson <va...@au...> 
>>> Gale wrote:
>>> The only things it has additional to TrackInfo are the 
>>> logo and the horizontal scroller, AFAICT.  
>>
>> Nowhere else in Audacity are there meters for individual audio 
>> tracks. How did you miss that?
> 
> What I meant (but didn't explain too clearly) was that the only 
> additional things it has from TrackPanel are the "image" and 
> scrollbars. 

You wrote TrackInfo previously. Now TrackPanel.

And you're confusing me with the use of "additional from" and
"additional to". Do you mean things that are in both or exclusive to one
or the other?

TrackPanel has scrollbars. Its tracks do not have instrument images.


>The meters are not from TrackPanel, correct? 

Why do you ask, when responding to my statement that they appear
"nowhere else in Audacity"?

The meters are *why* it's an alternative view of the same audio data.
It's not a derivative view.


> 
> 
>>> As Peter points out there is no equivalent in the Manual for the TrackPanel  
>>> class, and no real need for it. 
>>
>> Really? I'm not going to spare the time to look for it, but isn't there
>> something like "click in the dark gray area of the <Whatchamacallit> to
>> deselect all tracks"?
> 
> No. 

So where does the manual say how to deselect all tracks?


>TrackPanel cuts across the breakdown we have here:
> http://manual.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Quick_Guide
> 
> and the scrollbars are treated as part of "Tracks" rather than any
> larger unit.

I think that breakdown is simply confused and misleading. It separates
elements of a single track as if they are as distinct as toolbars. In
other words, the granularity of that diagram is inconsistent.

That diagram implies the drop-down menu and X track close box constitute
one separate item. It implies the rest of the TrackInfo is a separate
item. It implies the vertical ruler/waveform (of one track) and the
scrollers (for all tracks) constitute one item. Likewise, the "Timeline"
is shown as a separate item. And overall, the diagram implies that all
of them are as unrelated and separate as toolbars.

In fact, the Track drop-down menu is part of TrackInfo. The X close box
is not part of the Track drop-down menu, but it is part of TrackInfo. An
audio track display in TrackPanel comprises the TrackInfo, vertical
ruler, and audio display (waveform/spectrum/etc). That definition of an
audio track matches the first sentence at
http://manual.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Audio_Tracks, so that is
in conflict with the diagram, too.

So those three elements (TrackInfo, ruler, audio display) constitute one
track. Multiple tracks are shown in the TrackPanel, which has a
potentially larger virtual size than displayed size, so also has
scrollers. Note that the TrackPanel dark gray background surrounds
tracks, implying containment. In addition, the Timeline is not a
separate element, it is also contained and controlled by TrackPanel.


> 
> I think we say "click in the background outside the audio track" or 
> similar...

Background of what, then? Well, TrackPanel.


>... but I'm not going to go looking either. 

I would hope you should be motivated to do so, as the manual czar. You
think it's fine if it's not documented at all, or incorrectly?

I'm not continuing in this discussion because it's fun. It is not. I'm
doing so because I've noticed some significant errors and conflations in
the manual and would like to see them corrected.


> 
> 
>> Thanks, Peter! "Tracks Panel"? "Tracks Window"?
> 
> You mean as a term in the Manual for "TrackPanel"? 

Yes, I think that as TrackPanel is a functional element, it should be a
concept presented to the user, and "Tracks Panel" makes more sense than
"Tracks" to me because in fact, tracks are shown in the TrackPanel.


>If we must have 
> that, the choice impacts on any change to "Track Panel" too.     

So? "Track Controls" or "Track Controls Panel", and "Tracks Panel".
Seems like a good solution to me.


> 
> 
>>> Peter wrote:
>>> It can be considered as an alternative to the "Track Panels" -
>>> but enhanced with independent metering per track.  And perhaps that, or
>>> similar, is how we should describe it in the manual going forward.
>>
>> No. It's not an alternative to a TrackInfo, which is just a part of the
>> display of a single track in TrackPanel. Mixer Board has multiple
>> tracks, like TrackPanel, displayed in Track Strips (term that should
>> probably be capitalized, but isn't currently in the manual).
>>
>> Each Track Strip has controls analogous to those in TrackInfo, an
>> instrument image, and a display of the audio playback. You can
>> select/deselect tracks per Track Strip, or deselect all via the gray
>> area between strips (the Mixer Board background -- analogous to
>> TrackPanel background!). So a Track Strip is analogous to an audio track
>> in TrackPanel. And MixerBoard is an alternative view (to TrackPanel) of
>> audio tracks.
> 
> I see exactly what you mean, but I'd still say this is *not* an easy 
> concept to get across to users because:
> 
> * There is no waveform (or spectrum) in the Mixer Board (which 
>     is the obvious point user sees, not that the "Track Strip" is an 
>     alternative for the Audio Track)  

It's essential they understand the track is actually primarily the audio
data, and data can be displayed in different ways. An analogy is
spreadsheet data, that can be displayed in a table, as a bar chart, as a
pie chart, etc.

Even if there were no MixerBoard, they'd have to understand that, as
audio data can be displayed in *five* different ways in TrackPanel, not
just "waveform (or spectrum)" -- same data, different appearance.


> * If you have multiple tracks you have multiple TrackInfo's  

And each Track Strip in Mixer Board also has separate controls for each
track. I don't see your point.


> * There isn't any obvious equivalent of TrackPanel in the Manual
>     (and changing that is a "lot" of work)    

Some things are wrong, and been wrong for a while, and propagated. That
doesn't make it right. It's still incorrect and/or misleading.

I'm surprised you're willing to put so much effort into arguing about
avoiding effort to make the manual correct. I know you're not lazy, so
it seems simply intransigent to me, rather than wanting to work together
to make the manual correctly match the way Audacity actually works.


> * Meters are outside TrackPanel 

So what? That's *why* it's an alternative way of displaying the audio
data, much like Spectrum is alternative to Waveform, etc.

It wouldn't match a traditional hardware mixer board layout, and the
Timeline would be irrelevant, but conceptually we could just add a
"Meters" choice in the Track Drop-down Menu for audio track display and
instead of Waveform or Spectrum, etc, show meters for an audio track
display in TrackPanel. That's another way of thinking of why a Track
Strip in Mixer Board is analogous to an audio track display in
TrackPanel -- just another way of displaying the same data.


> 
> "One or more Track Panels with added metering" is exactly how it will 
> appear to most users unless a lot of care is expended on improving the
> current description. 

Users will see the meters and instrument images (as per the current
image in the manual), so it's not just one or more sets of "Track
Controls", and that's visually clear. Notable, too, that the controls
are not all in a separate panel in Track Strips, as they are in a TrackInfo.

Two of the three people in this discussion think the current usage of
"Track Panels" should be renamed "Track Controls" or "Track Controls
Panel".

The current description of Mixer Board is totally accurate with the
traditional definition of "Track Panel" as identical to "TrackPanel." I
think all that needs to change *there* is to call it "Tracks Panel".


>I agree saying Mixer Board is an "alternative view 
> to the Track Panel" isn't really correct... 

You're agreeing with the same position you've had all along, with which
I completely disagree. It *is* an alternative view to TrackPanel.


>...and should change, but when I 
> suggested the only understandable option was to link to "TrackInfo"
> I have in mind all the above. 

-1. Wrong granularity.


>I think it makes it a *lot* easier to describe 
> it more along Peter's lines, linking to TrackInfo, because there isn't 
> anything else sensible to link to. 

That's an indication that it's currently an incomplete description of
what's going on! There's no concept of TrackPanel in the manual. That's
a discrepancy. Doesn't mean we should link the whole Mixer Board to
TrackInfo just because the concept of TrackPanel is currently missing
elsewhere. Obviously, just the fact that Mixer Board contains multiple
sets of controls means it shouldn't be linked to the concept of a single
set of controls -- wrong granularity.

Mixer Board contains Track Strips. A Track Strip contains
controls/instrument/meters.

TrackPanel contains tracks. An audio track display in TrackPanel
contains controls/ruler/audio-display.

A Track Strip in Mixer Board is analogous to an audio track display in
TrackPanel. Mixer Board contains Track Strips, as TrackPanel contains
tracks. What's so conceptually hard about that?


>Your point about the Mixer Board
> backgrounds is good and should help get across a better explanation. 
> 
Thanks,

Vaughan