View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0003797 | Scribus | Usability | public | 2006-05-10 20:18 | 2011-12-30 16:37 |
| Reporter | mkoren | Assigned To | fschmid | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | N/A |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Platform | any | OS | any | OS Version | any |
| Product Version | 1.3 | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 1.5.0svn | ||||
| Summary | 0003797: can't add to a group | ||||
| Description | ...like you can a selection. Or combine two groups. This would be nice. (This is different than selecting the group(s) and additional elements and grouping them, as that creates a second group.) | ||||
| Additional Information | At least one way to do this might be dragging an item into a group on the outline. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Patch | |||||
|
|
I don't understand the difference. You can create groups, add single items to them, combine groups, ungroup them, leaving existing groups intact. What would be the advantage of adding to a group compared to creating a new one? The contrary might be useful: removing objects from a group. |
|
|
Both adding and removing a single object is possible with the sequence ungroup -> de/select -> group. As Christoph I also don't see the disadvantage of nested groups. |
|
|
>>> Both adding and removing a single object is possible with the sequence ungroup -> de/select -> group. Of course, but I'd consider this a workaround. If it would be possible to select a grouped object (modifier key?) and then right click > remove from group or something like that, that would be more elegant. |
|
|
>>>The contrary might be useful: removing objects from a group. Good point. >>>You can create groups, add single items to them, combine groups, ungroup them, leaving existing groups intact. Yes, it works, I just found it a bit messy when the subgroups don't actually reflect any desired semantic structure. Creates a mess in the outline, too (see 0003796). I would use nested groups where they actually mean something, and add to a group when that's what I actually have in mind. How about right click on an object while a group is selected > add to group? |
|
|
>>>How about right click on an object while a group is selected > add to group? I wonder how this could work. Imagine a magazine with 150 pages and 200 groups. How can one determine to which group an item should be added? |
|
|
You'd select the group first. There has to be a group selected right before you click or this option wouldn't be available. You wouldn't add an item to a group on some unrelated page anyway, it's probably right next to it. Alternatively, even easier, another modifier + shift adds an element to the selected group instead of only adding it to the selection, but I'm afraid we're running out of modifiers already. |
|
|
>>>but I'm afraid we're running out of modifiers already. Yep, this _is_ a problem. What about changing the status of the group instead (right click?), so that it is temporarily "open" to add new items? |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006-05-10 20:18 | mkoren | New Issue | |
| 2006-05-11 00:34 | christoph_s | Note Added: 0011226 | |
| 2006-05-11 00:40 | avox | Note Added: 0011228 | |
| 2006-05-11 00:47 | christoph_s | Note Added: 0011229 | |
| 2006-05-11 16:45 | mkoren | Note Added: 0011234 | |
| 2006-05-11 20:23 | christoph_s | Note Added: 0011239 | |
| 2006-05-11 20:52 | mkoren | Note Added: 0011240 | |
| 2006-05-11 22:14 | christoph_s | Note Added: 0011241 | |
| 2006-05-12 22:48 | mhanski | Relationship added | related to 0003794 |
| 2006-05-13 16:47 | christoph_s | Relationship added | child of 0003812 |
| 2008-02-06 18:49 | christoph_s | Status | new => acknowledged |
| 2011-11-18 11:12 | fschmid | Status | acknowledged => resolved |
| 2011-11-18 11:12 | fschmid | Fixed in Version | => 1.5.0svn |
| 2011-11-18 11:12 | fschmid | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2011-11-18 11:12 | fschmid | Assigned To | => fschmid |
| 2011-12-30 16:37 | cbradney | Status | resolved => closed |
