On 19/11/2017 19:22, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote:
@willemferguson <https://github.com/willemferguson> @dirkhh
<https://github.com/dirkhh>
we've discussed that we should not touch the old template which also
implies renaming it.
the solution is to create a new template with a different name.
questions:
* how is this template an improvement over the current one dive
template?
* how should we name it? using |Old| / |New| is kind of bad and has
no meaning.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<https://github.com/Subsurface-divelog/subsurface/pull/839#issuecomment-345533625>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE1-sj6Ap2_BhSbBc07SvgWQoIRjtk7wks5s4GO-gaJpZM4QjaYb>.
The agreement was that the original template should be kept. It was not
that that it should be kept with the same template name.
Look at the attached image, comparing the two templates (new template on
the left, old template on the right).
1) The old layout cannot gracefully handle table entries with more than
one line, resulting in a ragged bottom edge to the table. The new
template does not have the problem. Because of this the old template is
inefficient and wastes space on the page.
2) The new template gives almost 20% greater vertical increase in image
size of the profile, using similar or or even less total vertical page
space than the old template. The old template is wasteful of vertical
space in almost all elements of the layout if you start looking
carefully at it. Look at the heights of the rows in the table. Look at
white space between sections of the page.
3) The old template is inefficient with profile at the top. The
*important* information is in fact not the profile but the dive
information below the profile in the old template. I think I understand
why the table is underneath in the old template, because of problems
with the alignment of the table containing the dive data. From a layout
point of view the important information should be at the top. This is an
important layout problem. The new template puts the important
information at the top.
4) Ridiculous information like air temperature, which a dive computer
cannot measure accurately (believe me, I am an environmental scientist
that routinely works with weather stations) is replaced with more
meaningful information (in this case cylinder and gas information.)
Any one of the four above criteria on its own is sufficient grounds for
making the new template the default. Are you sure you wish to keep the
old template as the default? Do you have a compelling reason for keeping
the old template at all?
My proposal is to rename the old template as in the patch.
Kind regards,
willem
--
This message and attachments are subject to a disclaimer.
Please refer to
http://upnet.up.ac.za/services/it/documentation/docs/004167.pdf for full
details.
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
