Go?

Involved development of the OpenMW construction set.
User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5134
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Go?

Post by Zini » 17 Sep 2011, 18:05

My main problem with multiwindow interface is connected to "the OS with realy crappy window management" (i won't tell the name but it starts with "W").
Well said, sir!


The plan is still to offer some kind of sub-window/docking interface for people stuck with said window manager (or got so used to it that they don't recognise how limited it is even if they move to a different system). But we should not let this decision limit the quality of the multi-window experience.
But I never seen app like that in qt, or gtk (or any other toolkit).
Well, you see pieces of it all over the place (the multi-view interface in the application I mentioned above). But its very limited. I miss the times when I was still working on a system that had this design exclusively. Sometimes "modern" GUIs really feel like using stone knifes and bear skins.
I like GIMP interface
Really? You are the first one I hear saying that. Certainly GIMP has it strong points (proper support for multiple views, an optional alternative to these horrible menu bars that is at least a small improvement, IIRC in a branch an alternative to these wacky SaveAs dialogues). But overall, no thanks.

User avatar
Star-Demon
Posts: 73
Joined: 11 Aug 2011, 03:17
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Go?

Post by Star-Demon » 17 Sep 2011, 20:44

How about someone just draw a picture and we'll build it like that?

All I want are windows that are separated by usage (all items, all NPCs, All dialogue, All scripts) that I can drag and drop from - and dock em so I can drag easily without hiding or unhiding windows and memorizing hundreds of shortcuts. If it looked like VS, with the exception of the render window being too big for anything, I'd be happy.
"The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane." - Nikola Tesla

User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5134
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Go?

Post by Zini » 17 Sep 2011, 23:49

How about someone just draw a picture and we'll build it like that?
Not sure about that, since we are mostly talking about functionality and not about looks or shapes. What are we actually missing at this point?

Obviously there are a lot of details for various editing components that we haven't decided about yet. But if I understand the situation correctly, regarding the editor framework everything but the exact design of the sub-window/docking system has already be discussed. I would like a statement from pvdk to see what design decisions we are missing.

User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5134
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Go?

Post by Zini » 11 Oct 2011, 10:46

From an issue related to the launcher:
Qt has caught an exception thrown from an event handler. Throwing
exceptions from an event handler is not supported in Qt. You must
reimplement QApplication::notify() and catch all exceptions there.
That is also a very important point for the editor!

EmbraceUnity
Posts: 28
Joined: 24 Oct 2011, 04:41

Re: Go?

Post by EmbraceUnity » 04 Apr 2012, 18:47

Has everyone seen this?

https://bitbucket.org/jacmoe/ogitor/wiki/Home

It is called Ogitor, and it is an open source Qt-based OGRE editor and scene builder.

Would seem to be perfect to base our editor on.

User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5134
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Go?

Post by Zini » 04 Apr 2012, 18:52

Nope. We discussed that already. That is mostly an OGRE scene editor. But that is only a tiny fraction of what our editor will have to do. The GUI I am seeing on this link looks unfit for our purpose anyway.

User avatar
pvdk
Posts: 517
Joined: 12 Aug 2011, 16:34

Re: Go?

Post by pvdk » 04 Apr 2012, 20:20

Well since we are talking about the interface: I was thinking of a nice approach for our editor. Let me try to explain what I have in my head. I was planning to go with a MDI/Multi-window approach but that is a crippled solution in my opinion. Instead, I would like to replicate the interface of Qt Creator in the sense that it is a tabbed interface based on the different sorts of editing you can do with the editor. Each activity has its own tab, for instance World editing would have a tab and Dialoge and Quest editing goes in another. The layout of each tab page would be entirely customisable and the user will be able to create his own tabs. I also would like to make these tabs detachable so you can have one activity per screen or per virtual desktop.

This movie illustrates the idea, but imagine it with a more tabby and native look, but I think having the tabs on the left side of the screen is a good idea:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5gMAMSz77Q

User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5134
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Go?

Post by Zini » 04 Apr 2012, 20:33

Don't like the look of it. Too much sub-windowing. And it doesn't look like it properly supports working with multiple Windows; not to mention that I don't see how you can fit model-view being a 1 to n relation into it. Also, this seems to force users into using a tabbed interface. That should be kept optional.
Each activity has its own tab, for instance World editing would have a tab and Dialoge and Quest editing goes in another
Don't know how much you actually have working on MW modding, but that doesn't match the workflow that I have experienced in the past. Usually you will perform several "activities" in parallel (e.g. quest writing usually involves also doing some world editing and scripting work).

swick
Posts: 96
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 13:00

Re: Go?

Post by swick » 04 Apr 2012, 20:44

I like the approach of blender. Basically you've a set of different functions. You can arrange them like you want (split or join a view and change the function of the view). You can save the arrangement of the views (or whatever it is called) and switch between them. There are a few preset arrangements to choose from. (www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQKsXmlDf78#t=5m10s)
my .02€

User avatar
pvdk
Posts: 517
Joined: 12 Aug 2011, 16:34

Re: Go?

Post by pvdk » 04 Apr 2012, 21:43

You both raise valid points and I like the way Blender does things. It will prove a bit difficult to implement this but I think we should go for that approach.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests