search

opengisch / solocator

GNU General Public License v3.0
0 stars 1 forks source link

Allow to select more than one sub layer of a group layer structure. #9

Closed andreasneumann closed 5 years ago

andreasneumann commented 5 years ago

image

3nids commented 5 years ago

while this sounds like a good idea, there are some considerations on the workflow:

1) common parent vs distinct layers: if Sondernutzungsplane and Natur / Landschaft are selected, are they inserted with Nutzunsplanung as parent or as two distinct layers/groups?

2) If Nutzunsplanung and Sondernutzungsplane are selected, is Sondernutzungsplane the only layer expected to be loaded or all the others too?

Question 2 would at least be solved by using checkboxes instead of a selection.

andreasneumann commented 5 years ago

Good questions.

Regarding 1: I think it would make sense to have Nutzungsplanung (Karte) as parent group. If the use doesn't like this, it can easily be reorganized afterwards. We can't make everybody happy without introducing a ton of options.

Regarding 2: if you can introduce checkboxes with a reasonable effort, this would be good - or we find a good logic together. I don't know what behaviour qt offers for such tree structures? Do we have any documentation for selection scenarios in a tree combobox in qt?

3nids commented 5 years ago

2) I am on it now, basically you implement what you want (there is no default behavior, checking items has no influence on parent/children). I would propose that checking an item would affect all his children. That would have an implication for one in the way that we only create what is checked, having a common parent being up to the user.

does this work for you?

andreasneumann commented 5 years ago

yeah - sounds fine to me.

3nids commented 5 years ago

looking more at it, I am just wondering if it is really a good idea. The complexity brought by this is quite high both in terms of code and UX / intuitivity. If one wants to load 2 distinct items it is easy to reopen the dialog. How often customizing is going to happen? If it's 1 over 10 times, I would say it is not worth it.

andreasneumann commented 5 years ago

How about concentrating on the other things first - like loading PG layers with symbology - and then come back to this problem at the end of the project?

We also need to make sure we can load tables with only attributes (no geometry).

I'll need to dig up a test case (sample) for no-geometry tables.

3nids commented 5 years ago

like loading PG layers with symbology

this is already achieved since 0.5.5

I'll need to dig up a test case (sample) for no-geometry tables.

yes please, it shouldn't be a big deal to enable this

3nids commented 5 years ago

I'll branch out and keep this on the side for now