Do not jumble waypoint dots and waypoint names too close to each other in layer preferences

[jidanni]

First, you need to "round up the cattle" here into at least two groups, not all jumbled together:

1. The dot on the map group, i.e., the point itself.
2. The label group.
3. Some other group, maybe? Like some picture? I've never tried that.

Be sure the groups have clear <HR> bars or whatever, separating them.

Let's take the "waypoint color" item. It should be called "waypoint label color". Anyway, if this were in a new "waypoint label" group, then you could just call it "color".

Wait. I see. OK, the correct label for that button would be "waypoint symbol color" or "waypoint dot color"

And Background belongs in the new Label group.

That way, the user would no longer think that perhaps unclicking A, should make B and C irrelevant, and thus greyed out.

As to what unclicking A actually does, well that shall remain a mystery. (No, the manual didn't say.)

Let's take a breath of fresh air and try to say this all again:

There needs to be Waypoint Label options:

a b c

Waypoint icon options:

a b c

[rnorris]

Agreed; the ordering can be improved to group label options together and symbol/icons options together. So I think regarding icons would be better as 'A, C, B'.

Unfortunately, due to way the dialog is created with a 1 to 1 alignment of a property setting and the GUI widgets - it is not straight-forward to insert separators. I'll have to think more on how this can be done, but if it is 'too hard' then it won't be given much priority.

Agreed; 'Waypoint Color' and 'Waypoint Size' - would be better stating what specifically relate to, so 'Waypoint Marker Color' and 'Waypoint Marker Size'. Although easy to change the English text, it will be some effort to update any existing language translations.

Waypoint Symbols are not mutually exclusive to the Marker drawing, since there is a Symbol of '(none)', in which case the marker properties will used. The priority order is (highest first):

1. (Thumbnail style) Image (provided the Draw Waypoint Image setting is on) and there is an associated image.
2. Symbol (provided the Draw Waypoint Symbols setting is on) and it is not '(none)'.
3. Marker

Agreed; the manual should contain this waypoint drawing priority scheme.

Provisional improved layout:

[rnorris]

"it is not straight-forward to insert separators"

Turns out relatively easy.

Here's the in progress variant (separator is bit easier to see in a light theme but of course gives a little more vertical spacing):

[jidanni]

Background => Waypoint Text Background

even if "the meaning should be obvious".

Wait, "Draw Labels" seems semantically unrelated to the stuff following it. I am hoping for something even a split personality drunk airplane pilot can all link together via matching words.

Also be sure if "Draw Labels" is unchecked, the stuff it controls should become greyed out unchoosable.

Also I detect two super-thin extra hard to see <HR> lines, that don't even extend to the left enough to separate the headers column. E.g., above "Draw Waypoint Symbols" the super-thin bar doesn't even extend that far.

And if it weren't for the checkbox, we would think the super thin bar is just another big button separator. I.e., flop. UX disaster. Probably need ugly dashed fat bars. But not too fat. Else they will be the same size as the buttons and seem to be a button instead of a separator.

[rnorris]

This has been improved insofar as much that is practicable with GUI framework / i18n concerns.