Feature/inverted slider

[ccric]

Adds a new inverted property to the slider widget to change the direction of the slider. PR includes needed adaptations for fluent, cosmic, material and cupertino styles. Tested with different values and horizontal as well as vertical orientation.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[tronical]

Thanks for the PR :). Could you explain to us what the use-case is for this?

[ccric]

Thanks for the PR :). Could you explain to us what the use-case is for this?

I'd love to! As a developer developing a UI for a component where values shall be adjustable by the user, as well as set by an external API, I think I need to use in-out properties with two-way bindings.

For the user using the UI, a vertical slider with the highest value on top is desired, because that feels more intuitive than having the high value at the bottom, as it is right now.

One solution to this could be to give the two-way binding some bijective function to invert the values, but I could not figure out how to do this. Using two one-way bindings with expressions did not work either.

So I figured that one easy to use approach would be to invert the slider. If this behavior could be achieved another way, I would be happy if you could explain it to me.

I could certainly implement a custom widget with this behavior, but I think this use case is common enough for a general implementation.

[tronical]

Ahhh, now I see. Thank you!

Perhaps we've made a mistake in our API design here, and we should have from and to instead of minimum and maximum.

We could rename those and keep the old names for compatibility.

Such a direction would be my preference over a boolean inversion.

Florian, what do you think?

[ccric]

That would be cleaner, yes. I was not sure about how you handle API breaks, so I tried a solution without breaking existing apps, first.

[ogoffart]

We should also look at the guidelines from the platform and depending we might need to make sure that it is in the right direction by default

[tronical]

We should also look at the guidelines from the platform and depending we might need to make sure that it is in the right direction by default

Could you clarify what platforms you have in mind? Or instead of platforms, do you mean right-to-left vs. left-to-right when used in locales where we want to mirror layouts?

[tronical]

On further thoughts, in my opinion, in the short term this particular feature - support for inverted ranges - could be implemented without changing the API but by automatically supporting the case when the minimum is greater than the maximum and implicitly "inverting".

Basically treating "minimum" as "from" and "maximum" as "to" - as if we had given them these names from the beginning.

[ogoffart]

Could you clarify what platforms you have in mind?

I mean Windows for fluent, Mac for cuppertino and so on.

For example, the fluent design says:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/design/controls/slider#range-direction For vertical slider, put the largest value at the top of the slider, regardless of reading direction. For example, for a volume slider, always put the maximum volume setting at the top of the slider.

But we have it by default in the wrong direction: This is our fluent vertical slider: As you can see, this is upside down (the blue part should be on the bottom)

Not sure what mac does.

But I'd say the first thing we should do before having this feature is to fix the vertical slider so it's not upside down by default.

[tronical]

So there are two issues:

1. The implementation of the Fluent style seems wrong.
2. We should make it possible to implement an inverted slide by allowing people to swap minimum and maximum. This is an edge-case that we can document but we don't necessarily need to rename minimum/maximum to to/from.