Organization of Folders / Plans

Hi Ben. Good input. Do you think you would want the expanded/collapsed state of folders & pages to stay in sync between tabs, too (if you expand a folder in one tab, it also expands in the other in realtime?), or just when you first open a new tab, it just starts with the same expanded/collapsed state as the previously opened tab and operates independently per tab after that?

From a technical standpoint, we would have to store this data individually per user in the database, or we could store it locally in the browser "local storage" or similar (if we use local storage, it would remember expanded/collapsed state per device, instead of per user, but no need to store in the DB...just stores locally in the browser - or "Indexed DB"). Both ways will work, we're just discussing internally which way will be better.

Heber, here's my thinking.

I'm working on civil takeoffs. I have one tab open and I have the civil folder open. I want to reference another civil sheet so I click to open a new tab on the new sheet I want to reference. The folder condition (expanded / collapsed) should match the condition from tab one.

If I have two browser windows open and one window has Architectural folder expanded and sheets being reviewed and another has Civil folder expanded and sheets being reviewed, I don't want the folders to change when the folder expansion is changed one window or the other.

I think my vote would be no to syncing across tabs and yes to matching the folder layout of the source tab.

Sounds good. Thanks for the input and real world scenario. Giving real world scenarios helps us go through lots of "what if" scenarios on our end. We'll discuss internally how to make it happen.

Great thread on views—this is a crucial issue for multiple users. For example, if User A hides takeoffs, User B ends up with that same hidden view, which can be confusing when they return to work. This is a complex challenge! A significant improvement would be to preserve the folder structures as you left them. If you have some folders collapsed and others open, that state should remain for your individual view. The same applies to sorting once that feature is implemented. Ensuring individual user views is key, and we need to get this right for multi-user environments.

Regarding the two-window setup, I would prefer them to sync by default. Additionally, what if we could add the ability to display drawings on the report tab? That would provide another location to view drawings, complementing the thread where I suggested activating takeoff from this report window too because you can sort link a ninja here. I'm a picture person, so just imagine the drawings on the left pane........hmmm probally a bad idea but still we have so many options here is fun to imagine.

Kyle, thanks for the input. We're working to separate the views so that it keeps track of expanded/collapsed and visible/hidden per user, but then we have to decide how to have "shared" view (if we want that). What if someone wants to hide an item for all users. Maybe we don't give this option, and just let everyone control visibility on their own. Do you guys have need to hide stuff for everyone? Or would tracking visibility per user work fine?

@Heber

Great question. Start with by user is what is really needed for MVP, our people are smart and they can hide stuff on their own. As far as views, Ediphi has this figured out (well the UI sucks now but getting better) with shared views, default landing views, and personal views. Lets say I invite a trade partner to this "future" pdf and takeoff platform and I only want them to see the takeoff that is associated with what they might need to know. I would say shared views will be important in the future for external parties is my vote.

However keeping on the internal thought, if I have a MEP expert in my group, most of the users dont need to see all that noise and I would want to make a "view" that toggles off all the drawings, takeoff and other MEP shennagins. "Keep the clutter out" is a theme you might run with?

Sounds good. We'll keep it simple and start with per-user show/hide, and we can expand from there. After that is in place, should be easy for us to add more options after.

If the takeoffs were on overlays instead of pages, all you would have to do is share the relevant overlays with the relevant parties. These would suffice in giving users the required views. If edit permissions are granted then visibility would be for everyone. If edit permissions are not granted then visibility would be per the user.

This way you don’t have to define views after the fact, they are put together as a matter of fact and shared as needed.

Edit: ***This way you don’t have to define views after the fact, they are put together as a matter of course and shared as needed.

Out of the box consideration - I use 2 laptops with one of them having an additional 3 monitors. the latter being my "Takeoff workstation". I duplicate tabs often to be reviewing a spec, a detail and the primary takeoff location. I could see having the plans in all the scenarios suggested. Which leads me to believe the end result should be optional. The behavior I see now works real well in the sense the Pages area seems persistent to the view I am on for that monitor. So I may have my Civil folder collapsed on one tab/view as I am looking at the overall takeoff on that page, but on the other monitor I may have it open so I can quickly jump in between details. My take on this is that there really is not an overall solution other than a user being able to have options.

Mark,

What I gather from what you are describing is that a minimum of two different tabs is required: one for doing takeoffs and one for doing research. This is why I had suggested elsewhere that these two needs are separate. See Blueprint Tab. This, together with Takeoffs On Overlays Instead of Pages, solves almost all of these issues.