Re: [Audacity-devel] Sticky Tracks - Positional Linking checked in

[James C. <cr...@in...>]

Mark D wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:42 PM, James Crook <cr...@in... 
> <mailto:cr...@in...>> wrote:
>
>
>        * The menu item needs a check mark, because otherwise there is no
>          way to see whether you are enabling or disabling.
>
>
> Definitely.
>  
>
>        * Should a 'cut' affect all tracks in the group, whether done on
>          wave track 1 or 2 or label track 3 or 4?  I think yes, if linking
>          is easy to turn on and off.
>
>
> A cut in any wave track should affect all the label tracks in that 
> group. I don't think it should affect any wave tracks in that group. 
> Not sure if that's what you meant though. Also, cuts on label tracks 
> don't do anything (unless you try to cut an entire label, in which 
> case it'll delete the label).
Well...  if the user doesn't want those waves to stay aligned with those 
labels they can always place those waves below the label track...  I 
think it's also worth changing cut on a label track to shift labels - so 
it is consistent with wave tracks.  I think these usability details are 
best further discussed on wiki - it's getting harder to track in 
multiple e-mail messages.  So we take the discussion to there?
>     If you need some help on how-to create/add a dynamic button for this
>
>        (especially the XPM stuff) drop me a line by gtalk.  I'd still see
>        the graphics refinement as probably something to postpone until
>        after the mid term.  There are more vital aspects of the feature
>        still to be got working.
>
>
> Would you suggest working on that ahead of multiple label selection? 
> It definitely ties everything together like you said.
I'd suggest it, but no way am I taking responsibility should doing it 
(and other optionals) prevent you doing the core features.  Multi-select 
is one of the core features.  The toolbar button would tie the sticky 
label work modes/visual-cue/discoverability together nicely.  It's a 
low-risk addition too that should be perfectly safe to do ahead of 
multi-select, IF that's what you choose. 
>
>        I'd like to see you tackling the paste functionality.  You'll need
>        to define a user clipboard type to let the clipboard know there is
>        both audio AND labels to paste.  This is high importance for
>        usability of sticky labels and may be more tricky than you
>     currently
>        expect.
>
>
> I don't understand this part. Pasting parts into wave tracks already 
> expands/shifts labels correctly, so I'm guessing that's not what 
> you're talking about. Trying to copy and paste a label just creates a 
> new label at the insertion point. Do you want the functionality of 
> being able to paste labels?
If I cut some wave and three labels at the same time, everything shifts 
left on both wave and label tracks.  Good.  If I now move somewhere else 
and paste, the wave pastes correctly and labels move right, but the 
labels I cut earlier don't appear.   They got 'unstuck' somewhere along 
the way.

Fixing this so it works nicely IS optional.  It is not a 'must have' 
from the GSoC proposal, and it is fairly tricky.  If you were struggling 
to meet minimum requirements at this point I would have kept quiet about 
it.  Having it makes a big difference for people working with labels.  
It means paste works intuitively as well as cut doing so.

I'd like the functionality very much, but it is optional.

--James.