[Qgis-developer] QGIS Processing Framework

[Camilo Polymeris]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Mayeul Kauffmann
<mayeul.kauffmann at free.fr> wrote:
> Le mercredi 27 avril 2011 à 20:46 +0200, Paolo Cavallini a écrit :
>> Il giorno mer, 27/04/2011 alle 12.00 -0400, Camilo Polymeris ha
>> scritto:
>> > Good point. SAGA, as far as I know, does not provide information on
>> > which parameters are considered basic and which are advanced. Perhaps
>> > a list of parameters considered advanced can be included with the
>> > plugin. Not very elegant, because it would be out-of-sync with SAGA,
>> > but practical.
>>
>> It is the same approach used in GRASS: in fact, it is better (even if
>> not elegant, I agree) to be able to decide which options should be
>> exposed as default, and which ones as advanced). In fact it would be
>> also good to add a general option "user/power user"; in the first case
>> only default options will be exposed, in the second the full options.
>
> +1 for the concept of a "user/power user" checkbox.
> You could call it "Always show advanced options" which is more neutral
> (does not make any judgement on the user) and describes exactly what it
> does.

Agreed.

> Would be great to have an "Advanced options" checkbox on each window
> anyway, to be able to switch their visibility on a case by case basis.

If it is a check-box, tab or toggle button would have to be
considered. I am under the impression that the latter is more common,
but I don't know the rationale behind.

> In addition, where relevant (functions that use command-line tools or
> have command-line tools equivalent) and in advanced mode only, it would
> be great to have the GUI generate the command line corresponding to the
> options chosen in the GUI; the GUI would show this command line and let
> the user edit it (or run it as it is). There are many advantages:
> - the user knows exactly what is going to be executed; advanced QGIS
> users will be able to use the GUI but benefit from existing help
> targeted at the command-line users; debugging, sharing questions and
> ideas in a forum or saving/automating a frequent task is facilitated

Very good idea. It could even work both ways, and use that for
saving/loading parameter "presets".

> - you do not have to put very rare options in the GUI (power users can
> still add the options here when they need it, which should be rare).

The GUI would be auto-generated, so adding parameters means no extra
programming effort. Not putting things on the GUI would, thus, be a UI
design decision, to keep it from being cluttered.

Wow. This is getting more and more ambitious. Will have to see what
fits in only 1 summer :)

Thanks,
Camilo