I fully support this. I feel the current workflow is tedious. We have to remember the node number, open separate property window, move the window away if we forgot, select the node from drop down etc.
But I’m not clear about the “a check box in the Nodes section”. I check out Val just now and find out they probably implement what you mean. But only for notch option
and SA angle, no dimension.
My suggestion for seam allowance is that when I select the node, the property editor at the side will automatically show the usual seam allowance option for the selected node. Currently the property editor remains blank when I select any node.
Thinking back, you most probably mean the check box is not to specify the SA dimension, but to automatically show the SA that I already specified so that I don’t have to manually add the marking using external app.
I really like this idea. It would be amazing if it would also show the notches so that we could add a notch to a point and edit the type/number, as well as editing the SA before & after the point, directly from the Property Editor in Piece Mode.
We could expand a node’s context menu to include the notch type and subtype like it is in the Paths list. For what it’s worth I should probably update the context menu to include the notch count.
The Property Editor only currently works with the Draft mode data. It’s really just a duplicate of a tool’s dialog. In fact my eventual idea would be to eliminate the “property browser” code (which basically is extra code that duplicates the tool dialogs on the fly) and replace the Property Editor and Tool Dialogs with a common widget.
That being said it’s certainly possible to expand the use of the Property Editor dock for Piece mode, but IMO only if it’s done with normal Qt form widgets and not the property browser code - which is a PITA to work with.
Yes. I initially thought of having a global checkbox, but one may not want every seam allowance section to display a dimension… so I thought it could be by node… where you could check if you want an SA dimension to show before or after or both. We already have the before and after SA values that can be used in a text label.
Then it would be a matter of exactly how / where to display the dimension. Off the top my head…
It’s possible… but it would not use the “property browser” code which creates a tool Form and associated Widgets on the fly. It basically duplicates the tool dialogs… but does it with generic code, rather than through ui forms. In programming parlance - the property browser is a Widget factory. It’s a PITA to use. The “Property Editor” is simply a dock window named Property Editor with an an empty widget for contents.
Instead of using the property brower, we’d create a new “Nodes” QWidget form, and associated cpp and use that to fill the Property Editor dock as content. We can also add the Notch options to the Node context menu… which is easier to do initially.
Yeah… I think this will be a bit more intuitive, and quicker. Of course if you want to tweak the size geometry you’d have to go into the Pattern Piece Properties. In most cases though you’re just going too use the default geometry you set in the prefs.
I’ve also added a context menu item to change the seam allowance angle type:
and just to be complete I’m working on items for Excluded and Delete… even though these would more likely be done from the Pattern Piece properties Seam Allowance->Paths as you’re looking at the path nodes list.
Agreed. It should make it more interactive. BTW… I almost forgot and had to add the code to disable the menu items if the piece is locked.
Also in working on the Seam Allowance angles… I have some thoughts on some name changes that correct some misnamed angle options, while some others will maybe make it clearer what the angle does. I also was made aware again that the “right angle” options do not work correctly.
Agreed. It should make it more interactive. BTW… I almost forgot and had to add the code to disable the menu items if the piece is locked.
Also in working on the Seam Allowance angles… I have some thoughts on some name changes that correct some misnamed angle options, while some others will maybe make it clearer what the angle does. I also was made aware again that the “right angle” options do not work correctly.
I can’t wait for this.
