View Single Post
  #4  
Old 01-21-2005, 11:10 AM
Jedimaster Jedimaster is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 11-24-2004
Posts: 11
Yes, you are right in that I am suggesting that only the first instance of an info item be primary and always shown in the Data Explorer Pane and logical links to be excluded from the Data Explorer Pane. Originally, one of the reasons why I find such a layout to be "cleaner" was that the deletion of an info item would result in it being taken of the Data Explorer Pane and there would be no more copies of it lying around. But then, since Ctrl+Shift+Delete does this, part of my impetus for suggesting such a layout has been removed. Nonetheless, I still feel that showing only the primary instance in the Data Explorer Pane will make UR more intuitive to use.

Consider the following layout in the Data Explorer Pane under the current structure:

Root
|
|___Item1___Item5
|
|___Item2___Item3___Item4
| |___Item5
|
|___Item3___Item4
| |___Item5
|
|___Item4

I have assumed that there is such a thing as primary and secondary links. Item5 is a sub-tem of Item1 and is assumed to be the first instance. Excluding secondary links from the Data Explorer Pane will result in the following structure:

Root
|
|___Item1___Item5
|
|___Item2
|
|___Item3
|
|___Item4

To see the logical links from Item2, click on Item2 on the Data Explorer Pane and Item3 will be shown only in the Child Item Pane. Clicking on Item3 in the Child Item Pane will also cause the corresponding first instance of Item3 to be shown or highlighted in the Data Explorer Pane. This way, the location of Item3 can be seen in the Data Explorer Pane.

The combined use of the Child Item Pane, Parent Item Pane and Data Explorer Pane should overcome the problem of getting "lost" due to drilling up and down repeatedly. The Data Explorer Pane serves to show the location of the selected child or parent item.

In my opinion, the above arrangement does look neater and more intuitive to use now that the use of child/parent linkage has a more wiki feel to it.

Please note that I'm not criticising UR in any way. I feel that it is one of the best info managers around (if not THE best) and I've even bought a license for it last week. The above is just my personal view.
Reply With Quote