Re: [Rosegarden-user] Pivotal Decision: the future of toolbar-based notation entry

[Darcy K. <dar...@sy...>]

I kind of like the idea proposed.  I used to use a midi sequencer under 
Win 89.  It had a similar method of using the keyboard for selecting the 
notes.  you used the up/down arrows to cursor through the notes, and the 
period to cycle through the dotted notations.  There was another key (I 
forget which) that cycled through the accidentals.  I have always missed 
the ease that that method allowed in entering notes.

D. Michael McIntyre wrote:
> Heikki jumped into some refactoring work to clean up the duration-related 
> menus in the notation editor, and related keyboard shortcuts.  Now you use 
> Shift+Y to switch to inserting rests, Y to switch to inserting notes, and . to 
> toggle between dots and no dots.  This coupled with I II III-based (or do re 
> mi in the English speaking world) keyboard shortcuts should really improve the 
> workflow for people who prefer to use these quick entry keyboard methods.
>
> He wanted to extend this kind of thinking to an effort at reworking the 
> duration toolbars in the notation editor.  I have just committed the final 
> draft of a working version of this new scheme to a branch.  You can, and if 
> you have any interest in the outcome of this decision, should, check it out 
> at:
>
> svn co 
> https://rosegarden.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/rosegarden/branches/notation_toolbar
>
> As big a change as this is, I feel like we have traditionally been crippled by 
> major decisions like this, and I don't want this debate to drag out forever.
>
> Let's get cracking, and decide something, shall we?
>
> The old scheme had three columns of toolbars, with a "notes toolbar" on the 
> left that had standard durations at the top, dotted durations at the bottom, 
> and the same arrangement on a "rests toolbar" immediately to its right, in 
> what I will call the "four corners" layout.  (Keep your working copy of trunk/ 
> or even Classic for comparison.  They can run side by side.)
>
> The new scheme puts notes, dotted notes, rests and dotted rests onto separate, 
> otherwise identical toolbars, and adds two (hopefully self-evident) action 
> controls.  These two new controls are used to pick which of the four toolbars 
> is visible at any given time, and they are a graphical alternative to the 
> Y/Shift+Y/. keyboard scheme, which can also be used in conjunction with this 
> new layout scheme.
>
> It works fine here.  Very clean and snappy.  Is it an improvement?
>
> Advantages:
>
>  * Only two columns of toolbars on the left makes a more compact and better
>    balanced layout
>
>  * The "landing zone" for mouse operations never changes for a given duration,
>    regardless of the type of note or rest being entered
>
>  * Potential future extensibility to include double dotted durations with
>    some minor rework that could definitely get done in time for release if
>    there is any demand
>
>  * Potential to add arcane new types of durations for the price of a new
>    toggle icon in the "control area" of this scheme, which is a very low price
>    to pay in terms of screen real estate in order to add another heaping glob
>    of duration icons (this would not get done for Thorn, if ever)
>
> Disadvantages:
>
>  * Many extra mouse clicks required to enter a typical 8. 16 pattern using the
>    toolbar entry method (especially when entering notes in sequence):
>  
>    click 8     (selects 8 duration)
>    click .     (switches to dotted version of 8)
>    click staff (enters 8.)
>    click 16    (selects 16. duration)
>    click .     (switchs to plain version of 16)
>    click staff (enters 16)
>
>    Opposed to:
>    click 8.    (selects 8. duration)
>    click staff (enters 8.)
>    click 16    (enters 16 duration)
>    click staff (enters 16)
>
>   * Extra mouse clicks also required to intermingle notes and rests, although
>     I think this is done much less frequently, and is of less concern
>
> Michael's personal conclusion:
>
> I don't really care about double dotted notes or the ability to enter bizarre 
> new arcane types of durations, so that cancels out two advantages.
>
> The extra work for the 8. 16 8. 16 pattern is a serious disadvantage.
>
> I've always found the "four corners" layout annoying, and have wanted to 
> something to improve it for the longest time.  It does present all the 
> possible durations where they are all one mouse click away from being 
> selected, but I have had a tendency to go back to the last place I came from, 
> so I'd enter 8. then it was not uncommon for me to enter 16. by accident, and 
> have to fix it.
>
> Therefore having the same "landing zone" where 8 is 8 is 8 is 8 and 16 is 16 
> is 16 is 16 is a serious advantage.
>
> These two cancel each other out, narrowing the decision down to compactness 
> weighed against the increased tedium of rest switching.
>
> I conclude that the new scheme gets my vote, and I think I can try to learn 
> new habits so as to minimize the disadvantage of the new scheme in the 8. 16 
> scenario.
>              
> Now then, that's enough of me talking.  This one is a pretty big paradigm 
> shift, and everyone who has a vested interest in this should please weigh in 
> as soon as possible.
>
> Thanks.
>