LINK node suggestion

Ok, maybe contentious, but....

LINK nodes are handy to make flows neater looking and allow links between tabs.

Suggestion:
Part 1:
Links connected locally.
They are nice for local connections to hide joints going the wrong way (right to left on screen).
These can confuse you sometimes.
My rule is unless short, any joints between nodes right to left of the screen are done by link nodes.
This is particularly true with routine blocks of nodes. It helps keep them as blocks.

When opening the nodes edit window I am bombarded with a list of all the tabs and their link nodes.
Fair enough.
Improvement - only show link nodes which have names assigned by the user on other tabs.
Local link tabs are shown irrespective of their name state.
Why?

  • If I am linking stuff on the same flow most of the time I am not worried about naming the link nodes.
    And I can usually connect the two nodes from the edit screen.

{
Another cheat way is to put the two link nodes (the in and out) close.
Then I join them. Cut the one to be moved, go to that part of the screen and Paste it.
Then I wire it to the other node/s.
}

A quick zoom out and I can see what is going on.

  • If I am linking to another tab, I would say 99.9% of the time that destination link node will be named by me.

So only showing link nodes with names would really help de-clutter the huge list of unnamed link nodes.

Part 2:
When the big list of other link nodes is open scrolling through checking who is connected to whom is not easy.
An extra button to show only linked nodes will then show you a cut down list of other link nodes connected to this one.
That will reduce the load on the user checking what is connected.

Then, if there are any incorrectly linked nodes, they can be easily un-ticked.
They won't/don't need to disappear from the list until that list is closed. Handy in case you accidently (?) un-tick the wrong one.

Part 3:
(This is really asking)
Maybe an option - somewhere - to show a tree structure for that node.
Showing it's interaction a bit better with the other flows.
(Saying it is an in node)
Have something like this:
The green circle is included indicating the selected node.
So if it was an out node, the circle would be around the respective node on the right side.

Link_node_example

Yeah, the names are lame. But I hope it gives you the idea.
They would probably be the flow name and name of the node.

Hi, thanks for those. I'm not sure which version you are running currently - but some improvements are on their way. In the upcoming version 1 the list is now a collapsible tree see below


And the current tab is the one with the * next to it - so all in all the list should be much easier to navigate,
And once on the flow selecting the node will show which other tabs/flows it is connected to.

So hopefully these will both go some way to matching your thoughts.

2 Likes

Ok.

Yes, I am not running the latest version.

0.20.6-ish.

Your picture shows a * on the current tab.

But it doesn't show to which other ones it is connected.

Yes the next picture shows the links to the remote flows/tabs. But it doesn't show the link names as well.
I get that this would take more screen space.

So my suggestion would go on what you showed as Picture 1.
"Show all links" and it would list all connected tabs there.

So though what you show is better/nicer, it isn't quite as I suggested.

Sorry, I am not that good with graphic editing stuff, or I would construct a better explanation of what I mean.

sorry - I hadn't ticked any of the connections in the top pic - which then show to which they are connected. - but yes there isn't a "show all connected" filter button. And yes the editor view doesn't show link names for exactly that reason (space and layout).
No worries I get what you mean. As I said hopefully it is a partial solution to your requirement.

Yes, but that takes effort to scroll through all the tabs.

A button to show connected nodes would collapse all unused tabs (actually hide would be better) and only show the nodes on/in tabs used.
No other nodes.

That way it is a lot more compact view of the list to which the node is connected.

Re-reading your reply. Ok thanks.
I wasn't wanting to be/sound argumentative in the reply.

(Got bored)

Here is a (poor) example of what I mean with the node edit and how it should look.
As I said: I am not a graphic designer. But I hope you get the idea.

And if you clicked on any of the In nodes, it should show a similar tree but rather than the output node at the top, the in node would be showing the tree structure from it's point of view.

My comment on this topic would actually be a question. Every node that I provide a NAME to shows that name on the node within the tab, except the link nodes. Why is this? Trying to parse the connections without a name can get confusing.
ST.

If you hover the mouse over the link node the name appears.

Hope that helps.

Another "option" is (though messy) is to add a comment node near the link node and put the name there.

Better solution!
Pictures say 1000 words.

No, the difference is that other nodes show their names by default, while the link node has it hidden by default. Check the Appearance tab in the node edit dialog.

3 Likes

Thanks for that feedback. That did the trick. Much appreciated.

1 Like