Element group inspector has no visual indication, if the settings are applied
Visibility
I know this is kind of hard, since element groups aren't static, you can choose any elements to create element group. But buttons set Visible and set Invisible are useless. If I select some elements and I want to set all of them invisible I should just check the box. I suggest checkbox named invisible. By default you want all elements visible, unless you check the box.
As for elements with different status of visibility, just let me check the button to hide all and then reveal them. Synchronize it by checking the box.
Color
Color is particularly odd. You have to select color, then press the button Set color. If you manage to deselect the group, the color picker resets.
I suggest to remove Set color button. If the elements are of same color, set the color picker to that color. Else set it to rainbow like this one or a checkerboard. If I want to apply the color, just do it when I press ok on the color picker. I have Undo, I don't need a button that rudely asks me if I'm sure I want to use it.
Autoplace
This is the most nonsensical section of that menu. Why do I have 2 buttons that switch state, but neither of them shows to me if the autoplace function is enabled? Is it contextual? Is it one time thing? I'm not sure.
I suggest the same fix as to visibility. Replace buttons with checkbox. Set the default behavior as unchecked. If I want to synchronize all elements to that state. Let me check the box twice. I think that is a fair trade-off making user click twice.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
7jtzB0h.png | 638 bytes |
Comments
I know all this is in the process of being redesigned, but to clarify one thing: the reason for two buttons on visibility and autoplace is that the current state of those settings might be mixed, making it unclear to the user what a toggle would actually do. Of course, we live with that problem in the case of homogenous multiselection (eg, several staff text elements selected, some visible and some not). So I'm not saying it's 100% logical or consistent.