mmjee
Video Details
This is a point, than in my opinion, despite having a newer asthetic (I am indifferent to whether there are cards or not), the Piped UI for video details (such as in the search, or in channel pages, etc.) is much cleaner and more legible, while at the same time being more compact.
I personally cannot think at the moment of something better than how Piped does it, however if you do not want to do it the same way, then I'm sure you can think of a cleaner UI that does not waste space.
As it stands, after setting the columns to 6 (4 is a joke on displays that are not exceedingly narrow, such as phone screens in portrait mode, although those could have anywhere from 1-5 as the ideal option, depending on the screen size and resolution), I can only see two rows on Piped-Material, whereas on Piped, I can see three rows, with the last row only being slightly cut off, and barely at that (no information is offscreen).
On 8/31/22 17:24, moriel5 wrote:
This is a point, than in my opinion, despite having a newer asthetic (I am indifferent to whether there are cards or not), the Piped UI for video details (such as in the search, or in channel pages, etc.) is much cleaner and more legible, while at the same time being more compact.
The Piped UI doesn't distinguish between individual items, which is why I dislike it. Videos are discrete items.
I personally cannot think at the moment of something better than your Piped does it, however if you do not want to do it the same way, then I'm sure you can think of a cleaner UI that does not waste side.
As it stands, after setting the columns to 6 (4 is a joke on displays that are not exceedingly narrow, such as phone screens in portrait mode, although those could have anywhere from 1-5 as the ideal option, depending on the screen size and resolution), I can only see two rows on Piped-Material, whereas on Piped, I can see three rows, with the last row only being slightly cut off, and barely at that (no information is offscreen).
Is the problem that on smaller screens PM only shows two columns (two rows?) vis-à-vis Piped showing three columns? Sizing rows is automatically handled by either Vuetify or the browser. If you post the screen resolution and column count settings I can try to look into it further.
-- Regards,
@mmjee That is certainly reasonable, although I still think that Piped's function over form outlook could be beneficial to you, by providing insight over what needs improvement to be more functional, and then you can do it in a way that fits your views.
I realize that Piped does not distinguish between individual items, however I was referring to the way the information is layed out below the preview icon, where I personally think that the way Piped does it is much more legible and clean, while at the same time being more compact, not to whether it is distinguished differently or not (though I really like how you expressly put out that a channel is a channel).
And I was thinking more about the rows, however I can see that on my Razer Phone 2, when set to 1080p, I have two columns with Piped, and with Piped-Material I only have one column.
Regardless, in my opinion this is not an issue with a specific resolution (indeed, on that front, it actually works really see well), but rather with the way that the information is layed out, thus the information density is too low.
Unrelated: I now see that autocorrect broke quite a few of my posts, so I shall now be editing them to fix them.
On 9/1/22 14:50, moriel5 wrote:
@mmjee That is certainly reasonable, although I still think that Piped's function over form outlook could be beneficial to you, by providing insight over what needs improvement to be more functional, and then you can do it in a way that fits your views. I'm also trying to ensure the function is not hamstrung by form, but it's intentionally less compact to ensure there's a lot of slack and margin, for the ease of use.
I realize that Piped does not distinguish between individual items, however I was referring to the way the information is layed out below the preview icon, where I personally think that the way Piped does it is much more legible and clean, while at the same time being more compact, not to whether it is distinguished differently or not (though I really like how you expressly put out that a channel is a channel).
The only difference I can see is that Piped presents all the information on a single line whereas Piped-Material lays each one out on a single line. The risk with that is evident here » https://a.tmp.ninja/FctctzJG.png « where it breaks in the middle of a sentence because it finds a line break opportunity. The only way to fix this then would be to use a grid. Besides the performance and efficiency concerns (a grid per card sounds bad), it would also break when the width is not enough to sustain both of the columns, producing a confusing situation where some cards would have both on a single row and others breaking out into two.
And I was thinking more about the rows, however I can see that on my Razer Phone 2, when set to 1080p, I have two columns with Piped, and with Piped-Material I only have one column. The general rule for Material Design seems to be break into one column per row on anything below a Medium breakpoint. Showing two columns per row on a portrait mode phone seems to be a design mistake entirely, since making precise touches side-to-side is difficult.
Regardless, in my opinion this is not an issue with a specific resolution (indeed, on that front, it actually works really see well), but rather with the way that the information is layed out, thus the information density is too low.
Unrelated: I now see that autocorrect broke quite a few of my posts, so I shall now be editing them to fix them.
-- Regards,
Yep, that would certainly make sense, as it is more complicated to engineer something that would allow for more accurate touches than to simply add more space.
And the information regarding the line breaks is quite interesting. Thank you very much for the explanation. A grid does sound alluring, however those are two issues (even if I personally am alright with some cards having one line and some having two, that is not necessarily a good or consistent thing to have around).
And the general rule regarding Material Design sounds both reasonable and surprising to me at the same time (I know, this doesn't really make much sense), since I usually force grids unless the screen is especially small, since lists just make things much slower by ensuring I need to scroll far more than I would deem necessary.
On 8/31/22 17:24, moriel5 wrote:
This is a point, than in my opinion, despite having a newer asthetic (I am indifferent to whether there are cards or not), the Piped UI for video details (such as in the search, or in channel pages, etc.) is much cleaner and more legible, while at the same time being more compact.
The Piped UI doesn't distinguish between individual items, which is why I dislike it. Videos are discrete items.
I personally cannot think at the moment of something better than your Piped does it, however if you do not want to do it the same way, then I'm sure you can think of a cleaner UI that does not waste side.
As it stands, after setting the columns to 6 (4 is a joke on displays that are not exceedingly narrow, such as phone screens in portrait mode, although those could have anywhere from 1-5 as the ideal option, depending on the screen size and resolution), I can only see two rows on Piped-Material, whereas on Piped, I can see three rows, with the last row only being slightly cut off, and barely at that (no information is offscreen).
Is the problem that on smaller screens PM only shows two columns (two rows?) vis-à-vis Piped showing three columns? Sizing rows is automatically handled by either Vuetify or the browser. If you post the screen resolution and column count settings I can try to look into it further.
-- Regards,
Please create a new issue if this is a still an issue with an actionable solution.