Popup annotation

[cage2]

Hi!!

This is a draft of what suggested by @oatmealm in #80.

I used the help-echo property as discussed in the same thread.

Honestly i do not like the aesthetic of the popup on my system but this is totally subjective, of course. And, moreover, i agree this feature can help some users. So OK, i will deal with it! :-D

To activate the popup system a new customized variable has been added: annotate-use-echo-area.

I wonder what i am missing because this was too simple. ;-)

Bye! C.

edit: also i removed the internal link in the README as pointed out in #79

[oatmealm]

Will have a look shortly... sounds helpful.

I was just thinking, what if the annotations were shown in a side bar I.e a separate window that can be toggled on and off, while notes are synced with the main conetent buffer.

org-noter has this nice semi-automatic (I think you need to 'C-M .' first) sync facility that advances or backtracks the notes buffer in respect to your position in the pdf-view buffer.

[cage2]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:24:03AM -0700, oatmealm wrote:

Hi!

Will have a look shortly... sounds helpful.

Good! :)

I was just thinking, what if the annotations were shown in a side bar I.e a separate window that can be toggled in and out while notes are synced with the cone tent buffer.

org-noter has this nice semi-automatic (I think you need to 'C-M .' first) sync facility that advances or backtracks the notes buffer in respect to your position in the pdf-view buffer.

You could (sort of) use the summary window for something like that. Just search the database for the current file that the buffer is visiting.

This will show all the annotation contained in the buffer, though.

Although maybe could not be too difficult to write a function that makes that search for the user and cuts the summary to shown only the annotations that annotates text beyond the current cursor position in the buffer.

Interesting! But I have to think a bit about that! 🤔

Bye! C.

[oatmealm]

Looks nice :+1:

In the echo area "הערה מס 1" (comment no 1) ...

BTW the pointer was on the annotation in the buffer, but wasn't captured... the selection in blue is there by accident.

Must say though it's still probably more useful when in the buffer closer to the text.

[cage2]

Hi!

Looks nice +1

That's good! :)

In the echo area "הערה מס 1" (comment no 1) ...

I think this is dependents from the Emacs configuration (perhaps at compile time) or graphical toolkit used, please take a look at the results i get in the image below:

https://www.autistici.org/interzona/img/misc/popup.png

Yes seems there is an broken icon, no idea why! ;-)

Must say though it's still probably more useful when in the buffer closer to the text.

I agree, i think the old behaviour could be the default.

Anyway i like the idea to use a window to summarize the annotation in a single file! :)

Bye!

[cage2]

Hi @oatmealm!

I have added a new command: annotate-summary-of-file-from-current-pos that shows annotation in the active buffer that appears after the cursor position. Can you, please, take a look if this feature is more or less the suggestion you made in your first comment of this thread? Thank you!

C.

[bastibe]

This looks like a useful addition to annotate.el, in particular for typographically difficult scenarios such as variable-width fonts or overlay-heavy modes. I like it. Good work!

[oatmealm]

Can you, please, take a look if this feature is more or less the suggestion you made in your first comment of this thread?

Sorry. Didn't see this before. Will have a look!

[cage2]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 03:28:04AM -0700, Bastian Bechtold wrote:

Hi Bastian!

This looks like a useful addition to annotate.el, in particular for typographically difficult scenarios such as variable-width fonts or overlay-heavy modes. I like it. Good work!

Thank you! Part of the merits goes to oatmealm that suggested both and is helping with testing! Honestly this was not too difficult as i am building on top of existing package's code (and Emacs of course). Things seemes to go quite smooth...until fonts enter in the equation! 😉😉

Seriously, i think we are giving users more options to adapt this package in their setup. But i would still like to explore your proposal about using Unicode space (thin, hair and similar).

Now, may i ask you two question:

• i think the content of your message, slightly rephrased perhaps, could go into the readme as this provide a possible solution for persons that uses variable-width fonts, what do you think about that?

• which one supposed to be the next version number (after merging this PR): 0.8.4 seems to low but 0.9.0 to much instead, wich one is your opinion?

Bye! C.

[cage2]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 05:10:07AM -0700, oatmealm wrote:

Hi oatmealm!

Can you, please, take a look if this feature is more or less the suggestion you made in your first comment of this thread?

Sorry. Didn't see this before. Will have a look!

No need to be sorry, i am not in a hurry ;), just take your time :)

Bye! C.

[bastibe]

• i think the content of your message, slightly rephrased perhaps, could go into the readme as this provide a possible solution for persons that uses variable-width fonts, what do you think about that?

Good idea!

• which one supposed to be the next version number (after merging this PR): 0.8.4 seems to low but 0.9.0 to much instead, which one is your opinion?

Since this is a feature addition, it should go into the minor version, i.e. 0.9.0. I generally try to adhere to the semantic versioning convention of major.minor.bugfix, where major versions are for big milestones or backwards-incompatible changes, minor versions are for additions, and bugfix versions are for bugfixes only.

[oatmealm]

@cage2 What should I check out? Couldn't find this function on you pull request #81 ...

Ok, my bad. Problems is that on this branch I'm having serious problems with showing annotations. They sometimes appear, sometime not, and never written to the db...

I keep getting "The annotation database is empty" when I try the new command, and indeed the file pointed to by 'annotate-file' never gets written to...

[cage2]

Hi @oatmealm

@cage2 ~What should I check out? Couldn't find this function on you pull request #81~ ...

Ok, my bad. Problems is that on this branch I'm having serious problems with showing annotations. They sometimes appear, sometime not, and never written to the db...

I keep getting "The annotation database is empty" when I try the new command, and indeed the file pointed to by 'annotate-file' never gets written to...

I am sorry that you are having trouble, can you share a little file where the problem shows as you did before?

Bye! C.

[cage2]

Hi @bastibe !

• i think the content of your message, slightly rephrased perhaps, could go into the readme as this provide a possible solution for persons that uses variable-width fonts, what do you think about that?

Good idea!

Very well!

• which one supposed to be the next version number (after merging this PR): 0.8.4 seems to low but 0.9.0 to much instead, which one is your opinion?

Since this is a feature addition, it should go into the minor version, i.e. 0.9.0. I generally try to adhere to the semantic versioning convention of major.minor.bugfix, where major versions are for big milestones or backwards-incompatible changes, minor versions are for additions, and bugfix versions are for bugfixes only.

I think you already explained me the convention you adopted for this program but still semantic versioning just do not enter in my mind. And i even think it is a good convention! :-D

Anyway i can see now that 0.9.0 is the right version number, and i promise this is the last time you need to explain semantic version! :-D :-D

Bye! C.

[bastibe]

Anyway i can see now that 0.9.0 is the right version number, and i promise this is the last time you need to explain semantic version! :-D :-D

No problem at all ;-)

[cage2]

Hi @oatmealm!

Sorry to bother you but i wonder if you could provide a way i can reproduce the bug you met with this branch.

Bye! C.

[cage2]

Hi Bastibe!

I can not reproduce the bug pointed out by oatmealm, so i propose to merge it anyway. What is your opinion?

Bye! C.

[bastibe]

I can not reproduce the bug pointed out by oatmealm, so i propose to merge it anyway. What is your opinion?

If it looks good on your end, I'd say we merge it now, and deal with potential regressions later.

[cage2]

Hi @bastibe!

If it looks good on your end, I'd say we merge it now, and deal with potential regressions later.

Let's merge then! :-)

Bye! C.