On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 12:58 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:50 AM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:

After a bit more playing around, it seems that related settings are grouped. Filter selections within a group are 'OR'ed and the different groups are 'AND'ed.  If there was some kind of dividing line between the groups it would make it clearer.

 

Here is a mockup that groups the fields together into sections. Within each section, we 'OR' the fields. Between sections, we 'AND' them. Does this make sense? It's designed around how the underlying database is structured.

That's much clearer - thanks.

Andy

Changes to the site this week:

• INTERNAL: Wrote an app deployment system to automate deployment of new versions of the apps.

May 14, 2021:

• BUGFIX: The search filter on the Topics page was not working. Discussion
• CHANGE: Clicking on files in the Files section now opens them in a new tab, to be consistent with how we treat links in messages.
• BUGFIX: Re-indexed the Files search index to fix sort-by-type issues. Discussion
• CHANGE: Updated the icons in the Files section. Discussion
• CHANGE: Changed the ordering of sort-by-name in the Files section to not prioritize folders. Discussion

May 13, 2021:

• NEW: More work on catching more spam sent to groups from non-members.

May 12, 2021:

• APP BUGFIX: Fixed external links in messages. Discussion
• NEW: We now log in the activity log messages from moderators to members. The new activity log entry is Message to member. Discussion
• CHANGE: Make the Files search results page consistent with the normal Files page. Discussion
• BUGFIX: Using the 'Select all' check box to the left of the 'Display Name' column header on the member list also checks all of the member list filters. Discussion

Take care everyone.

Mark

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 07:58 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Here is a mockup that groups the fields together into sections. Within each section, we 'OR' the fields. Between sections, we 'AND' them. Does this make sense?

Mark -- Yes, it does make sense, and the horizontal rules in the mock-up represent a substantial improvement.

How does this interact (if it does at all) with the choices that subsequently appear in the Actions menu for the filtered list? That was the basis for my original #suggestion.

Thanks,
Bruce

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:35 AM, Andy wrote:

They used to display with Folders first, followed by Files, in the default view (with the up-arrow next to "Name").

Yes, that's the way it used to be in the default display instead of interspersed as they are now.

Duane

KWK - your image doesn't render for me, but I did have a look through the page code and I can see that Mark's using Font Awesome to provide the icons (see https://fontawesome.cc/Files/). As far as I can see from a brief look it's consistent across the site; for instance a folder icon is created by:

<i class="far fa-folder fa-lg"></i>

in both the listing and search results. The apparent switch to the white on black rather than black on white (now styled back to blue) would have been down to using the fas rather than far class by intent or typo, I think the code was actually generated as this in fact:

<i class="fa fa-folder fa-lg"></i>

Just my 2 Ningis worth...

Icons and file types still oddly not consist?

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 08:35 AM, Andy wrote:

If not you, then someone did.

The cat did it.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/an-introduction-to-asshole-cat-behaviors

 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Mark wrote, "I mean, not to be difficult or anything, but I haven't changed any part of the display on the Files page."

That's not quite true.

They used to display with Folders first, followed by Files, in the default view (with the up-arrow next to "Name").

Starting yesterday, they now display with Folders and Files intermixed.  Again, in the default view on the Files page.

So you changed something.  If not you, then someone did.

Andy

From my point of view, I find it confusing (amusing?) that the rest of you are talking about the "new" lack of colors in the icons.

That's because this, the black-and-white icons, is how they have ALWAYS looked to me (*).  I never (*) saw them in color.  They were crude, IMO, and always looked crude.

(*)  The exception being when I briefly used an XP computer, and suddenly they were in color.

I wonder what software Mark uses that wants to make them plain monochrome, which has now apparently spread to more platforms.

FYI, my platform is always a Windows-based PC.  I don't use a Mac, and don't use a Gizmo (what you probably call a "cellphone") for the web.  I use Google Chrome on all Windows platforms, so if Firefox or IE or Edge shows it differently, I wouldn't know it.  I get a feeling that the presence/absence of icon colors on groups.io is platform-dependent and maybe browser-dependent.  Why that would be, is an interesting question.  You'd think that good programmers would have figured this out by now.

Andy

Haha Mark, don’t be difficult! 😊 I’m completely uncaffeinated but I think I’ve used up that excuse. 🥲

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Maybe you could make the folder icons distinctly different now, even though they weren’t before? Could they be made blue now? Because I really find the new ordering scheme vastly superior. 

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Ok, so it’s the new positioning that’s at fault. (I could swear the old folder icons were blue! :-) In any case, it has now become prohibitively difficult (new characterization!) to distinguish folders from files in the list.

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 04:28 AM, Beth Weld wrote:

I really don't like the black icons for both folders and files.

Agreed. In my usual hyperbolic fashion, I'd call the new icons virtually useless. However, I do prefer the new ordering scheme, as long as the icons can be fixed. (Otherwise, you need to separate files and folders physically to be able to quickly tell them apart.)
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Interesting change - I just checked it, and I have to confess that I really don't like the black icons for both folders and files.  I have to think (oh no!) and really look at the listing to figure out what I'm looking at.  Can we at least have different colored icons to be able to quickly tell a folder from a file please? 
Thanks
Beth

I wrote that incorrectly and it could be confused.

I didn't mean that folders have both icons at the same time.  It is one or the other.  But (see https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/29420) after doing a Search in Files, some folders are identified as "File" instead of "Folder", and the ones that say "Files" have the vertical file-icon rather than the horizontal folder-icon.  As a result, the folders are displayed with a mixture of both kinds of icons, and you can't use the icon to tell whether it's a folder or a regular file.  Unless it has the folder icon, and then it really is a folder.

I never see colored icons at Groups.io on this computer.  They are only black, which makes it harder because the shape of the icon is the only difference.  I also have use of an older computer that still runs Windows XP and I think it shows colored icons, but not this one.  I guess you now see what I have been living with all along, in that department.

Andy