Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Popup annotation #81

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Oct 30, 2020
Merged

Popup annotation #81

merged 6 commits into from
Oct 30, 2020

Conversation

cage2
Copy link
Collaborator

@cage2 cage2 commented Sep 20, 2020

Hi!!

This is a draft of what suggested by @oatmealm in #80.

I used the help-echo property as discussed in the same thread.

Honestly i do not like the aesthetic of the popup on my system but this is totally subjective, of course. And, moreover, i agree this feature can help some users. So OK, i will deal with it! :-D

To activate the popup system a new customized variable has been added: annotate-use-echo-area.

I wonder what i am missing because this was too simple. ;-)

Bye!
C.

edit: also i removed the internal link in the README as pointed out in #79

cage added 3 commits September 20, 2020 14:48
…buffer.

  This feature is optional and can be activated using the customizable
  variable 'annotate-use-echo-area'
@oatmealm
Copy link

oatmealm commented Sep 20, 2020

Will have a look shortly... sounds helpful.

I was just thinking, what if the annotations were shown in a side bar I.e a separate window that can be toggled on and off, while notes are synced with the main conetent buffer.

org-noter has this nice semi-automatic (I think you need to 'C-M .' first) sync facility that advances or backtracks the notes buffer in respect to your position in the pdf-view buffer.

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 20, 2020 via email

@oatmealm
Copy link

oatmealm commented Sep 21, 2020

Looks nice 👍

In the echo area "הערה מס 1" (comment no 1) ...

BTW the pointer was on the annotation in the buffer, but wasn't captured... the selection in blue is there by accident.

Must say though it's still probably more useful when in the buffer closer to the text.

gnome-shell-screenshot-5KLIR0

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 21, 2020

Hi!

Looks nice +1

That's good! :)

In the echo area "הערה מס 1" (comment no 1) ...

I think this is dependents from the Emacs configuration (perhaps at compile time) or graphical toolkit used, please take a look at the results i get in the image below:

https://www.autistici.org/interzona/img/misc/popup.png

Yes seems there is an broken icon, no idea why! ;-)

Must say though it's still probably more useful when in the buffer closer to the text.

I agree, i think the old behaviour could be the default.

Anyway i like the idea to use a window to summarize the annotation in a single file! :)

Bye!

  this command shows a summary  window that contains the annotation in
  the active buffer that appears after the cursor position;
- added docstrings.
@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 22, 2020

Hi @oatmealm!

I have added a new command: annotate-summary-of-file-from-current-pos that shows annotation in the active buffer that appears after the cursor position. Can you, please, take a look if this feature is more or less the suggestion you made in your first comment of this thread?
Thank you!

C.

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 28, 2020

This looks like a useful addition to annotate.el, in particular for typographically difficult scenarios such as variable-width fonts or overlay-heavy modes. I like it. Good work!

@oatmealm
Copy link

Can you, please, take a look if this feature is more or less the suggestion you made in your first comment of this thread?

Sorry. Didn't see this before. Will have a look!

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 28, 2020 via email

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 28, 2020 via email

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 29, 2020

  • i think the content of your message, slightly rephrased perhaps, could go into the readme as this provide a possible solution for persons that uses variable-width fonts, what do you think about that?

Good idea!

  • which one supposed to be the next version number (after merging this PR): 0.8.4 seems to low but 0.9.0 to much instead, which one is your opinion?

Since this is a feature addition, it should go into the minor version, i.e. 0.9.0. I generally try to adhere to the semantic versioning convention of major.minor.bugfix, where major versions are for big milestones or backwards-incompatible changes, minor versions are for additions, and bugfix versions are for bugfixes only.

@oatmealm
Copy link

oatmealm commented Sep 29, 2020

@cage2 What should I check out? Couldn't find this function on you pull request #81 ...

Ok, my bad. Problems is that on this branch I'm having serious problems with showing annotations. They sometimes appear, sometime not, and never written to the db...

I keep getting "The annotation database is empty" when I try the new command, and indeed the file pointed to by 'annotate-file' never gets written to...

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 29, 2020

Hi @oatmealm

@cage2 What should I check out? Couldn't find this function on you pull request #81 ...

Ok, my bad. Problems is that on this branch I'm having serious problems with showing annotations. They sometimes appear, sometime not, and never written to the db...

I keep getting "The annotation database is empty" when I try the new command, and indeed the file pointed to by 'annotate-file' never gets written to...

I am sorry that you are having trouble, can you share a little file where the problem shows as you did before?

Bye!
C.

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Sep 29, 2020

Hi @bastibe !

  • i think the content of your message, slightly rephrased perhaps, could go into the readme as this provide a possible solution for persons that uses variable-width fonts, what do you think about that?

Good idea!

Very well!

  • which one supposed to be the next version number (after merging this PR): 0.8.4 seems to low but 0.9.0 to much instead, which one is your opinion?

Since this is a feature addition, it should go into the minor version, i.e. 0.9.0. I generally try to adhere to the semantic versioning convention of major.minor.bugfix, where major versions are for big milestones or backwards-incompatible changes, minor versions are for additions, and bugfix versions are for bugfixes only.

I think you already explained me the convention you adopted for this program but still semantic versioning just do not enter in my mind. And i even think it is a good convention! :-D

Anyway i can see now that 0.9.0 is the right version number, and i promise this is the last time you need to explain semantic version! :-D :-D

Bye!
C.

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 30, 2020

Anyway i can see now that 0.9.0 is the right version number, and i promise this is the last time you need to explain semantic version! :-D :-D

No problem at all ;-)

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Oct 16, 2020

Hi @oatmealm!

Sorry to bother you but i wonder if you could provide a way i can reproduce the bug you met with this branch.

Bye!
C.

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Oct 29, 2020 via email

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Oct 30, 2020

I can not reproduce the bug pointed out by oatmealm, so i propose to merge it anyway. What is your opinion?

If it looks good on your end, I'd say we merge it now, and deal with potential regressions later.

@cage2
Copy link
Collaborator Author

cage2 commented Oct 30, 2020

Hi @bastibe!

If it looks good on your end, I'd say we merge it now, and deal with potential regressions later.

Let's merge then! :-)

Bye!
C.

@cage2 cage2 merged commit be998ca into bastibe:master Oct 30, 2020
@cage2 cage2 deleted the popup-annotation branch July 16, 2023 10:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants