From: Bob J. <Bob...@lb...> - 2008-06-27 18:37:55
|
At 1:11 PM -0400 6/27/08, David Duchamp wrote: >Bob, >I really like your plan for handling multiple systems. It should make >multiple systems much easier to handle and understand, and should >provide a firm basis for future development. > >I have two implementation concerns with your planned changes--both >easy to take into account, I think. > >1. For current users, the first system is the "default" system when a >system letter is not entered, e.g. a turnout system name is entered as >a number only. This should be the default, so current configuration >files continue to work as they currently do. You may have covered >this in your plan, but if so, I missed it. Right. The table/matrix for setting defaults would start with the current settings (the default defaults?) That's actually "first system" for system letters, but "last system" for throttles and programmer, for historical reasons. >2. Most JMRI users have a single system connection and almost all new >users start with single system connections. The current system >configuration GUI is challenging enough to new users, but I worry >that the new GUI will be even harder for them to get straight. I think >that this concern can be addressed by designing the new configuration >GUI with the goal of "simplicity for single system connection users". >Such users, for example, don't need to change the system letter, or >select which configuration defaults for throttles, etc., so they >should not be presented with options only needed for multiple system >connections. Right. All that is hidden behind the "show advanced preferences" checkbox. Although recently we've seen three examples of basic users finding their way into that. Maybe we shouldn't even show the checkbox until the program has been in use for a week? (I'm only partly kidding) Bob -- Bob Jacobsen, UC Berkeley jac...@be... +1-510-486-7355 fax +1-510-643-8497 AIM, Skype JacobsenRG |