various library usability issues

[brainchild0]

Currently, the library feature is difficult to use. It carries a host of quirky and difficult design features, especially in grid mode.

They include:

• Fixed number, size, and layout of cover images regardless of window dimensions.
• Cover images cropped if window size cannot accommodate above constraints.
• Unused space at bottom of window, in many other cases.
• Lack of obvious sorting strategy, lack of categorization, and lack of control of either.
• Lack of textual information about each item.
• Cover images cropped to fixed, prescribed aspect ratio.

A few changes that would immediately improve usability would be:

• Dynamic layout based on window size.
• Scalability of cover sizes based on sliding bar.
• Inclusion of title and author information in text beneath images.
• Filling of window with maximum number of items supported by current windows size and item scale.
• Continuous scrolling through entire set of items.
• Categorization by author, directory location, and other metadata fields.
• Allocation of square region for cover image, with true aspect ratio of image represented in that space.

A further issue to consider is whether document text might be opened in a new window, instead of the same window being switched between text and library views.

Reasons for favoring a new window include:

• Common use might entail opening several item texts from the same library view.
• Preferred dimensions for the library and text views might be different, wide dimensions being favored for the library view, whereas narrow windows, forcing short lines of text, improving readability for text views.

[babluboy]

@brainchild0 Thanks for raising this issue. I will use this to apply some improvements. However some of my early thoughts on the other features:

1. Fixed number, size, and layout of cover images regardless of window dimensions: Agree. Will try to fix this. Although I believe this is not as critical as many people will not keep re-sizing the window and leave it either at full size or at a size where a considerable number of books are visible.
2. Scalability of cover sizes based on sliding bar: Why is this required. The cover sizes of the books should automatically re-size based on the window size of the app
3. Inclusion of title and author information in text beneath images : A right click on the book cover brings up this info in the grid mode. I will rather not waste screen space for these details. In the list mode for library all of these are available so you can use the list mode if these details are important
4. Filling of window with maximum number of items supported by current windows size and item scale: This will be done as part of (1)
5. Continuous scrolling through entire set of items: Not sure what you meant by this. Will be helpful if you elaborate
6. Categorization by author, directory location, and other metadata fields: This is possible if you can type in the search bar of the library view. It gives better options to filter the library based on a number of details like author, genre, book title (series), location, etc. I agree if this can be made more apparent by providing these filters by a combo dropdown on the search bar as pre-configured filters
7. Allocation of square region for cover image, with true aspect ratio of image represented in that space: This is related to (2). Not all covers will fit into a square size, most images are rectangular in my view.
8. A further issue to consider is whether document text might be opened in a new window, instead of the same window being switched between text and library views: This is something I would like to avoid as many people like the app to be a single window and switch content based on workflow. This is one feature where bookwork differentiates iteself from the multi window UI like in Calibre

[brainchild0]

Thank you considering the suggestions each in turn.

I will offer a more adequate clarification and forceful defense of each issue, as required.

---

1. Fixed number, size, and layout of cover images regardless of window dimensions: Agree. Will try to fix this. Although I believe this is not as critical as many people will not keep re-sizing the window and leave it either at full size or at a size where a considerable number of books are visible.

I think window sizes are chosen by a much wider set of considerations than what is preferred within a particular application. Desktop environments allow users to create and to change the layout of various windows according to an evolving workflow that includes a multitude of separate windows. Optimally applications adapt to window sizes, without the need that window sizes adapt to applications.

2. Scalability of cover sizes based on sliding bar: Why is this required. The cover sizes of the books should automatically re-size based on the window size of the app

Window size and cover size would be chosen by the user based on completely separate considerations. Coupling the two variables reduces usability and provides no discernable benefit. For example, one reason to increase the size of a window is to show more covers. One reason to reduce it is to free space on the desktop. Neither object is facilitated by changing the size of the covers according the size of the window.

3. Inclusion of title and author information in text beneath images : A right click on the book cover brings up this info in the grid mode. I will rather not waste screen space for these details. In the list mode for library all of these are available so you can use the list mode if these details are important

You could make a toggle mode for this effect. Many users may prefer text and art, not a choice of one versus the other. The click feature works for only one item at a time, making scanning the entire collection infeasible.

5. Continuous scrolling through entire set of items: Not sure what you meant by this. Will be helpful if you elaborate

Move through the items with a scroll bar, as in a file manager, rather than flipping through static pages.

6. Categorization by author, directory location, and other metadata fields: This is possible if you can type in the search bar of the library view. It gives better options to filter the library based on a number of details like author, genre, book title (series), location, etc. I agree if this can be made more apparent by providing these filters by a combo dropdown on the search bar as pre-configured filters

For a collection of any considerable size, filtration based on one or more metadata fields would be the first act required to find some particular item. I suggest making the controls prominent, as in a sidebar, not hidden, as in a dropdown menu. For example, a sidebar might contain a foldable list of all authors.

7. Allocation of square region for cover image, with true aspect ratio of image represented in that space: This is related to (2). Not all covers will fit into a square size, most images are rectangular in my view.

Of course most covers are not square, but neither are they the arbitrary aspect ratio that is currently chosen, which is causing clipping.

The proposal is to display the cover in its true aspect ratio, with the size scaled to fit in an allocated square box.

8. A further issue to consider is whether document text might be opened in a new window, instead of the same window being switched between text and library views: This is something I would like to avoid as many people like the app to be a single window and switch content based on workflow. This is one feature where bookwork differentiates iteself from the multi window UI like in Calibre

You could make this choice configurable. Separate windows has a strong usability case, as presented earlier, and no reason is clear why users ought to choose between a fixed set of behaviors with Caibre and a different fixed set with Bookworm.

An application becomes prominent and attracts a respectable support community when its feature set is flexible enough to accommodate a range of preferences, environments, and cases. This aspiration is at odds with an attitude that suggests adopting a competing application because of a single feature not being considered for support in the current one.

---

For many items in the discussion, photograph viewing and file management applications may offer points of reference.

Additionally, music applications may provide useful examples of library management and metadata search.