Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-commits-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-commits-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B76BD5F7 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 17821 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2012 16:07:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-commits-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 17804 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2012 16:07:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact bloodhound-commits-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list bloodhound-commits@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 17794 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jul 2012 16:07:55 -0000 Received: from bloodhound-vm.apache.org (HELO bloodhound-vm) (140.211.11.32) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:07:54 +0000 Received: from bloodhound-vm.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bloodhound-vm (Postfix) with ESMTP id C337C8096E; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:07:54 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Apache Bloodhound" X-Trac-Version: 0.13dev-r10952 Cc: bloodhound-commits@incubator.apache.org Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.13dev-r10952, by Edgewall Software X-Trac-Project: Apache Bloodhound Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:07:54 -0000 Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org X-URL: https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ Subject: Re: [Apache Bloodhound] #67: Highlight tickets outputted by reports X-Trac-Ticket-URL: https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/67#comment:9 Message-ID: <070.ac24727c74018754ae53a478837a4b7f@incubator.apache.org> References: <055.933d3ded661f0e29c3dc13ef5d5ee6a6@incubator.apache.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 67 In-Reply-To: <055.933d3ded661f0e29c3dc13ef5d5ee6a6@incubator.apache.org> #67: Highlight tickets outputted by reports --------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: olemis | Owner: olemis Type: enhancement | Status: accepted Priority: major | Milestone: Release 2 Component: ui design | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: reports highlighting --------------------------+---------------------------------- Comment (by olemis): Replying to [comment:8 gjm]: > Replying to [comment:7 jdreimann]: > > Replying to [comment:3 gjm]: > > > It looks like the colours may have been dropped on purpose - that would mean that we need to decide whether we have an appropriate means of distinguishing the most important tickets while they are not in priority order. > > > > I believe we should look for a better indicator than colour - especially as the number of distinct colours needed grows it becomes difficult to differentiate between them and remember the meaning. There are only six colors , i.e. those defined for [http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/components.html#labels bootstrap labels] : || '''Value''' || '''Label classes''' || || 1 || `label`, `label-important` || || 2 || `label`, `label-warning` || || 3 || `label`, `label-success` || || 4 || `label`, `label-info` || || 5 || `label`, `label-inverse` || || 6 and higher || `label` || > > Let's not forget the significant share of population with colour blindness too. There's also a risk of highlighting very prominently something which may not be the focus of the user at all at that moment. > > Colour blindness is clearly a very good argument against colours. jftr , I guess this will be the same problems to differentiate between warning, info, success messages and buttons , etc ... > However, I suspect that the alignment solution may well have a greater risk of drawing focus than the whole row colours provided by Trac, though it is certainly a lot less attention grabbing than the bold colour blocks. > Maybe we can combine both methods . I mean it's possible to insert labels using different padding according to target value used to sort the result set . > An interesting aspect of the suggestion from Olemis is that there appear to be up to six levels available. yes , like I mentioned above ''';)''' > I wonder how far people will want to distinguish the absolute priority of a ticket with the priority attribute though. > in current implementation , there's no difference . Beyond those six values all tickets are rendered using light gray labels . > What if we go back to a whole row background but stay with a single hue and adjust the value? These kinds of scales are already a bit non-linear but we might also want to emphasise that with the value calculation as we could consider the distinction between the highest priorities as more important than between the lowest priorities. > IMO there is also the fact that Trac default highlighting uses two different background colors for each level i.e. even and odd rows respectively . That looks a bit annoying to me . Using labels the level is always highlighted the same way and this is orthogonal to the decision of having different background colors for even and odd rows (e.g. [http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/base-css.html#tables bootstrap table- striped class] ) . > > My suggestion is using alignment of the text in the priority column - high priority aligned to the left, lower levels to the right. > > The implication from the design was that it would only be the highest level (or the highest visible level) that would be promoted to left alignment if I remember correctly. /me recalls the same > We should of course consider whether we need to mark out anything but the most important work items in this way. Well , considering default priority values , this will only work for `blocker` value . Question is ... why not to highlight critical tickets as well ? > I think that there is a case for more granularity for users who are not not able to work on highest priority tickets, although it could be mitigated by more appropriate sorting. > > > We may also want to consider using priority as a secondary sorting method by default when it is not the primary one. > > Yes, that sounds like a very good plan. -1 for enforcing this rule in the code . IMO if that's the case then ''SQL'' report definition should be updated . Ticket queries consider nothing but priority for highlighting rows . -- Ticket URL: Apache Bloodhound The Apache Bloodhound (incubating) issue tracker