[Zubersoft]

In the old design, I had to create a clone of every song in the setlist, and clone all of the annotations, then while saving, I'd clear out all of the existing annotations, rebuild all of the annotations in the database, then replace all of the annotation lists in all of the original songs with the lists used in the editor. It's not that I can't support this with the new design, I just didn't want to go through the effort if there wasn't a convincing need for it.

You are correct - in addition to the original file being modified with snippets (which can't be canceled unless I made a copy of the file and replaced it as described previously), the auto-save feature wouldn't really work if I couldn't modify the database. One of the things that could happen in the old version is that users would lose changes they made either due to power running out, or the app being forcefully killed without saving, or anything along those lines. I wanted to prevent this loss of time and work if possible, so I added auto-saving.

If I get enough users requesting the ability to cancel, and there are good arguments for it, I can consider supporting a cancel option. I just think most of the time, it's not necessary, and having to explicitly click "save" is something I wanted to avoid. Now if users exit the annotation mode in any fashion (including just hitting the back button or a three finger tap), they don't have to worry about saving or canceling their changes - they are just saved automatically. 

Mike

[smw]

In the old design, I had to create a clone of every song in the setlist, and clone all of the annotations, then while saving, I'd clear out all of the existing annotations, rebuild all of the annotations in the database, then replace all of the annotation lists in all of the original songs with the lists used in the editor. It's not that I can't support this with the new design, I just didn't want to go through the effort if there wasn't a convincing need for it.

You are correct - in addition to the original file being modified with snippets (which can't be canceled unless I made a copy of the file and replaced it as described previously), the auto-save feature wouldn't really work if I couldn't modify the database. One of the things that could happen in the old version is that users would lose changes they made either due to power running out, or the app being forcefully killed without saving, or anything along those lines. I wanted to prevent this loss of time and work if possible, so I added auto-saving.

If I get enough users requesting the ability to cancel, and there are good arguments for it, I can consider supporting a cancel option. I just think most of the time, it's not necessary, and having to explicitly click "save" is something I wanted to avoid. Now if users exit the annotation mode in any fashion (including just hitting the back button or a three finger tap), they don't have to worry about saving or canceling their changes - they are just saved automatically. 

Mike

I'm not sure whether you're replying directly to me here, or to Palosanto, but just in case:

I can see why you wanted to change the design!  But having said that, I find it difficult to imagine losing changes due to running out of power, if only because it doesn't make sense to start editing if the battery is that low to begin with.  I've been using MobileSheets since late 2012, and I never once ran into a situation where the app was killed by anything other than my choosing to exit.  Still, I can't disagree with wanting to be careful!

I can't give you a good reason why a cancel option is necessary; I've definitely had situations where it was very useful, but it's been a while and I can't remember the details.  Right now I can't think of any situations that would apply to me in which an option to undo all changes made in the current session wouldn't be just as good as an option to cancel the session; the two aren't identical operations, but the result is close enough to identical for my purposes (and if that ever changes I promise I'll give you details :-).

[Zubersoft]

smw - As far as the sizing of stamps, I'd rather not add an extra tool for that, but what about having an option to edit size after placing a stamp? If enabled, when you place a stamp, a size popup would be displayed and you could drag the slider or use the -/+ to specify the size. Tapping away will dismiss the size popup, and the stamp tool will continue to remain active, so you can continue placing stamps. Changing the size on the popup would change the size for the tool so that any new stamp annotations would use the same size. The only annoying thing about this is you would have to dismiss that size dialog each time until the setting was disabled.  Would that better suit your workflow?

As far as the cancel/save, thanks for providing your thoughts on that. I think an option to undo all changes is probably sufficient for most users. I like the idea of using a long press on the undo button to trigger that, but the downside to doing that is it is not obvious to users to do that, so they would only be aware of that option by reading the manual.

Thanks,
Mike

[smw]

smw - As far as the sizing of stamps, I'd rather not add an extra tool for that, but what about having an option to edit size after placing a stamp? If enabled, when you place a stamp, a size popup would be displayed and you could drag the slider or use the -/+ to specify the size. Tapping away will dismiss the size popup, and the stamp tool will continue to remain active, so you can continue placing stamps. Changing the size on the popup would change the size for the tool so that any new stamp annotations would use the same size. The only annoying thing about this is you would have to dismiss that size dialog each time until the setting was disabled.  Would that better suit your workflow?

As far as the cancel/save, thanks for providing your thoughts on that. I think an option to undo all changes is probably sufficient for most users. I like the idea of using a long press on the undo button to trigger that, but the downside to doing that is it is not obvious to users to do that, so they would only be aware of that option by reading the manual.

Thanks,
Mike

Yes, the option you describe would work perfectly for me. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about having to dismiss the size dialog, though; I'd be perfectly happy to have it up permanently while the stamp tool is in use, and presumably it would disappear by itself when a different annotation tool is active.

If you decide to do that, I'd also like to request the same thing for text annotations; I don't think it would be appropriate or necessary for any of the other annotation types.

For the undo all changes option, I personally have no preference between long press vs. a separate button.  It seems to me that the best choice is whichever one makes the least work for you in the long run.

[Zubersoft]

What I am suggesting is that when you place a new stamp annotation, a popup will be displayed so you can change the size for just that annotation. It wouldn't make sense to leave the size indicator up, because it only applies to the annotation that was just created. My goal in doing this is so that you don't have to switch to a different tool to change the size of the stamp you placed. I'm trying to avoid having more floating windows that stay up all the time blocking parts of the score and requiring ways to show/hide them. 

For text annotations, they are handled differently. If you tap on a text annotation with the text tool to edit it, any changes made to the text tool are applied to whatever text annotation is currently being edited. If you use the radial menu to adjust the size, then there is absolutely no need for having a floating window that does the same thing. The reason I can handle text this way is there a concept of them being actively edited. There is not really the same idea when placing stamps, unless you select them with the selection tool. 

Mike

[smw]

What I am suggesting is that when you place a new stamp annotation, a popup will be displayed so you can change the size for just that annotation. It wouldn't make sense to leave the size indicator up, because it only applies to the annotation that was just created. My goal in doing this is so that you don't have to switch to a different tool to change the size of the stamp you placed. I'm trying to avoid having more floating windows that stay up all the time blocking parts of the score and requiring ways to show/hide them. 

For text annotations, they are handled differently. If you tap on a text annotation with the text tool to edit it, any changes made to the text tool are applied to whatever text annotation is currently being edited. If you use the radial menu to adjust the size, then there is absolutely no need for having a floating window that does the same thing. The reason I can handle text this way is there a concept of them being actively edited. There is not really the same idea when placing stamps, unless you select them with the selection tool. 

Mike

I didn't realize that new text annotations can be modified this way, but that makes sense and answers my request (and I apologize if you already explained that earlier in this thread; if you did, clearly I missed it).

For stamps, you say it wouldn't make sense to leave the size indicator up.  I see your point but I'm not sure I agree with it:  If the semantics of the size indicator are that it changes the most recently applied stamp and all new ones (since it adjusts the default size for new stamps), I can see a use for having it remain on the screen as long as the stamp tool is active. In a perfect world, I'd adjust the size of the first stamp applied in a session and all new stamps in the same session would start out at just the right size -- but in a world subject to Murphy's Law, I can easily imagine a sequence of placing several stamps of different types, and having to adjust the size more than once in the sequence.

[Zubersoft]

I can't support both ways of working though - if modifying the stamp tool size changes the one you just created, then there is no way to create a stamp, and then create another stamp with a different size, as changing the stamp tool size will change the size of the one you just created. It would basically require that every user place their stamps at the wrong size before modifying the tool to make it the right size, which seems backward. Whether I have a separate size popup to control this or you just used the stamp window size slider, the effect would be the same, because based on what you said, you want to be able to adjust the size for the stamp you just created, but also stamps placed after that. That's why I was suggesting a temporary popup to adjust the size after the stamp is created - you dial in the size and then you can continue with creating the next stamp, whose size you can adjust after it is created as well.

With the stamps dropdown, you get an active preview of the size which can help in determining if the stamp size will be approximately the right size. This isn't present on the floating stamp window, because I didn't want it blocking that much vertical space. Similarly, I didn't put the settings for the stamp tool in the floating stamp window, because it seemed like it would just take up too much space. Perhaps one thing I could do to improve this is make the preview area and the settings area at the bottom something you could expand/collapse if it's necessary to get access to those in the floating window.

I should add that with the new stamp implementation, due to the fact that it's now based on a font, and not just images, if you select a size for a stamp, all of the other stamps from that category should be sized in a similar fashion, as it's just adjusting the font size. If you are placing sharps, flats, etc, the size should be consistent and reliable for what you would want to use across the entire page. So it's more likely that once you find the right size for a stamp, the other stamps should be the correct size too.

[smw]

I can't support both ways of working though - if modifying the stamp tool size changes the one you just created, then there is no way to create a stamp, and then create another stamp with a different size, as changing the stamp tool size will change the size of the one you just created. It would basically require that every user place their stamps at the wrong size before modifying the tool to make it the right size, which seems backward. Whether I have a separate size popup to control this or you just used the stamp window size slider, the effect would be the same, because based on what you said, you want to be able to adjust the size for the stamp you just created, but also stamps placed after that. That's why I was suggesting a temporary popup to adjust the size after the stamp is created - you dial in the size and then you can continue with creating the next stamp, whose size you can adjust after it is created as well.

I see your point.  I think my opinion is, or perhaps I should now say was, coloured by the experience of having different stamp types be such different sizes.  As you said below, using fonts instead of individual images really changes the way this works, so I hereby withdraw this part of what I was asking for.

Perhaps one thing I could do to improve this is make the preview area and the settings area at the bottom something you could expand/collapse if it's necessary to get access to those in the floating window.

That makes a lot of sense to me.

I should add that with the new stamp implementation, due to the fact that it's now based on a font, and not just images, if you select a size for a stamp, all of the other stamps from that category should be sized in a similar fashion, as it's just adjusting the font size. If you are placing sharps, flats, etc, the size should be consistent and reliable for what you would want to use across the entire page. So it's more likely that once you find the right size for a stamp, the other stamps should be the correct size too.

This new implementation is a major improvement.  I just spent a bit more time playing with stamps, and I agree that there will be much less need to adjust font sizes going forward.  Thank you so much for getting that done!

Having said that, there's one point I forgot to mention before:  when a stamp is selected, the resize handles around it obscure the stamp itself, making the stamp difficult to see while it's being moved. Like the edit bar, the handles disappear while the nudge tool is being used, but reappear immediately afterward. The only way to be certain of what the stamp looks like after a move is to deselect it, and, if it's not in the right place, repeat as necessary.  In 2.x, I believe there was a selection rectangle around the stamp, but without handles; could we go back to that, perhaps as an option?

On a different topic, while playing around just now I noticed a peculiarity with undo.  Consider this sequence:
   1) Place a stamp.
   2) Delete the stamp.
   3) Place a highlight.
   4) Press the undo button.

What I'd expect to happen is for the highlight to disappear.  What actually happens is that the highlight disappears, but the stamp reappears.  I don't know whether this is the intended behaviour or a bug, but it seems to be undoing two actions at once.  ...except that pressing undo again doesn't remove the stamp.  I don't understand that part at all.

[Zubersoft]

Instead of removing the selection handles, I could just enforce a minimum size for the selection box around the annotation. This would ensure there is adequate spacing around the annotation to clearly see it and make it easier to drag the individual handles. The downside is that it might look a little strange to have a much larger box around the annotation than what is needed to enclose it. Alternatively, I could look into a different way of visualizing an annotation is resizable. I'm not sure what that is that the moment, but I can try to think of other ways of indicating that a particular corner or edge can be dragged.

I tried to repeat the steps you described, but when I hit undo, it just removed the highlight and the stamp did not reappear. So something weird is definitely happening there. I'm not sure how to reproduce it at the moment, but I'll keep my eye out for it.

Thanks,
Mike

[smw]

Instead of removing the selection handles, I could just enforce a minimum size for the selection box around the annotation. This would ensure there is adequate spacing around the annotation to clearly see it and make it easier to drag the individual handles. The downside is that it might look a little strange to have a much larger box around the annotation than what is needed to enclose it. Alternatively, I could look into a different way of visualizing that part of an annotation can be resized. I'm not sure what that is that the moment, but I can try to think of other ways of indicating that a particular corner or edge can be dragged.

I tried to repeat the steps you described, but when I hit undo, it just removed the highlight and the stamp did not reappear. So something weird is definitely happening there. I'm not sure how to reproduce it at the moment, but I'll keep my eye out for it.

Thanks,
Mike

A minimum size for the selection box would work, but I think you're right that it would look strange.  It seems to me that stamps are a special case here, because it doesn't make sense to scale a stamp asymmetrically, very much unlike pretty much every other annotation type you support (my first instinct was that text is another exception, but even there it may make sense to stretch a text annotation in just one direction if the text has a drawn border around it).  Alternatively, instead of circles that intersect the bounding box, perhaps the handles could be outward pointing arrowheads on the outside of the box?  I haven't played with this much yet in 3.0, but in 2.x one thing that always confused me was that some handles increased the size of an annotation (typically a highlight, in my case), while others moved it, and I could never remember which was supposed to be which.

Silly question, but at first you had difficulty reproducing the issue with where the edit bar appeared, then you observed the issue on a different tablet.  Did you try the undo sequence on that tablet also?

[eichelbe]

Although there are still discussions, I just wanted to say that you fixed my two problems. The cursor window is not overlying the text anymore and can be moved and... surprise ... the sync is working again and seems to be faster than ever.

Thank you very much,
Holger

[palosanto]

What I am suggesting is that when you place a new stamp annotation, a popup will be displayed so you can change the size for just that annotation. It wouldn't make sense to leave the size indicator up, because it only applies to the annotation that was just created

One can use the handles to resize  stamp without changing the set size.  No need to display the size popup.  
However for text this doesn't have a useful effect. The handles dont resize the font.  It would be good to be able to resize the font similarly to the stamps.

Regarding the old cancel/save, I agree it seems a lot of work for the rare potential risk of losing the work, at least myself I usually do 3 or 4 annotations and exit annotation mode  so even if I lose power I don't see a huge effort in redoing them. It's not that you place annotations for hours usually ....
So I'm fine actually the way it is now.

[STEELBAS]

I like the idea of using a long press on the undo button to trigger that, but the downside to doing that is it is not obvious to users to do that, so they would only be aware of that option by reading the manual.

Well, with some of the tools you solve this by placing a small triangle in the bottom right corner of the icon to indicate more options, couldn't the same be done for the undo icon? I'm no UI expert but I'm familiar with that concept to indicate a long-press from other software, at least.

[smw]

I just installed 3.0.5 for the second time (it showed up as an upgrade last night and I installed it then, and now it showed up again as an upgrade but with the same version number and release notes).

...and while looking at it just now, I happened to open a couple of songs which had highlight annotations created years ago, in whatever version of MobileSheets Pro was current at the time (I don't remember how long ago that was, but based on the time stamps of the corresponding files on my Linux desktop computer, the file I'm looking at now was probably copied to my tablet and modified somewhere around August 2013).

Looking at the 2-page file now, I see seven highlights on the first page, and two on the second page.  All of them have been reduced to approximately the size of one note head, and none of them are near their original position.  The relative positions are actually similar, but the absolute positions are very different.

The first attached image (screenshot_tablet.png) shows what the first page looks like right now on my Galaxy Note Pro 12.2 tablet.

Interestingly, the same page looks just fine on my Galaxy Note 9 phone, as shown in the second attachment (screenshot_phone.png). This is with the same version (and same second installation thereof) of 3.0.5, but the phone is running Android 10 whereas Android updates for the tablet stopped at 5.0.2. I maintain the database on the tablet, and sync it to the phone (always in that direction).  Of course the tablet is the device I use to read from; the phone is basically just a backup copy.

This is a serious problem for me, so I hope there's an easy fix for it.

[Zubersoft]

Is "Draw highlights behind content" enabled or disabled on each device? The OS version shouldn't really have any impact on this issue. That setting is really the only thing that comes to mind that has any impact on the rendering of highlight annotations. Having said that a number of fixes were made between all of the updates that impacts how some annotation types were transferred from the old design to the new. Can you restore a library backup on the tablet, or synchronize changes from the phone to the tablet to see if annotations need to be updated for that particular song? 

Thanks,
Mike