Delete between labels

[Edgar]

In the same launch as above I tried some more things. I can now see that it is selecting a region in the LT that puts the link chains in the wave track (WT), and it happens on any LT/WT pair:

upper snippet.png (18.19 KiB) Viewed 1361 times

In fact, try this: ON at launch, gen noise, use menu to create an LT--WT has chains all over.

OK, after playing around with this I think I see my problem--I think the drawing of the chains in the wave are generally correct but there is one case where they are wrong and that is the case I see most often as it is the only condition I was testing with for the initial discussion (which had nothing to do with drawing chains). The problem is that after creating a labeled region (with linking ON) the chains in the WT are NOT drawn so I never expected them to be drawn. when they were I thought it was a problem!

[steve]

The problem is that after creating a labeled region (with linking ON) the chains in the WT are NOT drawn

Isn't that because the chains are not shown within a selected region?
I think it would be less confusing if the chain background was visible on selected regions as well as unselected regions. (perhaps using a negative of the chain image).

I assume if you select between labels, that selection would obey the same rules for display of that selection in audio tracks as a selection inside a region label or any arbitrary region in the label track would?

The rules when clicking in the label text area are already quite complex, so I think that there needs to be consistency between what happens with double clicking and what happens with clicking in label text.

Do you think a selection region should always be drawn over white space?

Yes, definitely.
In the following example, the tracks do not indicate linking, though if the selection is deleted (DEL key) then you can see that the tracks obviously are linked.
In fact I think it would be most useful if selections showed up on white space as well as on audio, since white space can be deleted, time stretched, linked, cut ... just as if it were silence.

screenshot.png (23.64 KiB) Viewed 1359 times

[Gale Andrews]

PM but could see no easy way to attach a pic

I've turned on attachments in PMs. If it gets abused we can turn it off again.

I think all your images are working correctly as Al intends, Ed.

I think it would be less confusing if the chain background was visible on selected regions as well as unselected regions. (perhaps using a negative of the chain image).

I think there's pros and cons, depending if you see a selected track with sync-lock on as "different" to the same track if you turn sync-lock off. You could argue functionally that particular track itself is identical with sync-lock on or off. If we went for that idea I guess there would be off-white tiles which would turn off and on exactly when the icon in the track panel does.

it would be most useful if selections showed up on white space as well as on audio, since white space can be deleted, time stretched, linked, cut ... just as if it were silence... In the following example, the tracks do not indicate linking, though if the selection is deleted (DEL key) then you can see that the tracks obviously are linked.

Yes, though the sync-lock icon in the Track Panel tells you those unselected tracks are sync-locked. I suppose it depends more if people object to white space appearing selected when sync-lock is off.

I guess you could put either or both points to the -quality list. Maybe drawing selections in white space has the stronger case?




Gale

[steve]

Yes, though the sync-lock icon in the Track Panel tells you those unselected tracks are sync-locked.

I know that - but it still catches me out repeatedly and I'm sure I'll not be the only one.
When I'm busy working on a creation, I want it to be obvious what is going to happen when I press this button. I don't want to have to stop and check "now did I select sync-lock or not?". This is why they put LEDs on mixing desks - so you don't need to stop and examine if a button is pressed down, or still up.

The board attachment quota has been reached so I'll start a new topic about this.

I guess you could put either or both points to the -quality list.

Good idea. It'll be interesting and useful to get a range of views.

[steve]

It appears that the "Adding Features to Audacity" has reached the quota for attachments.

I've started a new topic specifically for the "links over white space" and used remotely hosted images.
http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic ... 20&t=39234

[Gale Andrews]

It appears that the "Adding Features to Audacity" has reached the quota for attachments.

Fixed by increasing the global attachment quota and just tested you can now upload attachments again.


Gale

[waxcylinder]

<<<so this thread should only be trimmed, not deleted>>>
Noted, and accordingly I've made it a sticky thread here in the FR section. We could instead move it to Audio Processing for retention in the forum, but that I think would render your reference in the Wiki incorrect Gale? - Peter 5Sep10.

Moving this to another board would of course break the link on Proposal Label Enhancements but if it's more normal to move a retained thread from this board to Audio Processing, please do that and change the link on the Wiki page accordingly.


Gale

Well that was an interesting learning. I duly moved this thread to the Audio Processing section today - but surprisingly this does not appear to break the link or require an edit to the Wiki.

WC

[kozikowski]

<<<discovering the tools you describe is nontrivial.>>>

Yes, and, he said, raising a bloody hand, that whole thread is a work-around for Audacity not directly supporting Edit Points.

Zoom in to point 1
I (in point)
Zoom out and back in to point 2
O (out point)
Del.

I know "I" and "O" are probably used for something else in Audacity, but those are the keys I'm used to on video editors.

Koz

[Gale Andrews]

<<<so this thread should only be trimmed, not deleted>>>
Noted, and accordingly I've made it a sticky thread here in the FR section. We could instead move it to Audio Processing for retention in the forum, but that I think would render your reference in the Wiki incorrect Gale? - Peter 5Sep10.

Moving this to another board would of course break the link on Proposal Label Enhancements but if it's more normal to move a retained thread from this board to Audio Processing, please do that and change the link on the Wiki page accordingly.


Gale

Well that was an interesting learning. I duly moved this thread to the Audio Processing section today - but surprisingly this does not appear to break the link or require an edit to the Wiki.

Thanks, Peter. Seems the Forum software is clever enough, once you move the topic, to store the old url and redirect it to the new board "Audio Processing" (even though it shows the old "Adding Features" URL in the address bar). Certainly makes life a bit easier.


Gale