Important: These forums are for discussions between SkyDemon users. They are not routinely monitored by SkyDemon staff so any urgent issues should be sent directly to our Customer Support.

Stacking of airspace is upside down


Author
Message
Gerhard66
G
Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162, Visits: 344
The stack of airspace’s in the what’s here menu seems to be upside down. 
Probably just a little bug and hopefully not a feature ;-)



Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.8K, Visits: 8.6K
Airspace is listed from the surface upwards. That is deliberate, as people are more likely to want to know about lower airspace than higher airspace, on average.
publicom
p
Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 38, Visits: 89
Tim Dawson - 2/22/2022 10:03:45 AM
Airspace is listed from the surface upwards. That is deliberate, as people are more likely to want to know about lower airspace than higher airspace, on average.

It is extremly confusing as the list is right beside the Column which is the other (right) way round.
Also, why should people more likely want to know about lower airspace? I fly most of the time between FL 65 and 95.
But even those, who do can easily get used to look on the bottom first.

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.8K, Visits: 8.6K
Firstly because most people fly lower than you do, and secondly because many people use SkyDemon on smaller screens, if we showed higher airspaces first in the list, the lower airspaces are more likely to need a scroll of the screen in order to see.
publicom
p
Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)Too Much Forum (225 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 38, Visits: 89
Tim Dawson - 5/16/2022 9:44:45 AM
Firstly because most people fly lower than you do, and secondly because many people use SkyDemon on smaller screens, if we showed higher airspaces first in the list, the lower airspaces are more likely to need a scroll of the screen in order to see.


I agree. But that does not mean, that the order is right or makes sense. It means, that the default scroll position should be at the bottom, not the top.

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.8K, Visits: 8.6K
No, it really doesn't. Even more often-accessed items such as waypoints are at the top of the list.

The stack on the left is a representation of spacial features and it makes sense that it's laid out pictorially. The list on the right is a list of what's under your finger, and like most lists it's best with the most frequently-accessed items at the top.

I understand you dislike the fact the different sides are laid out differently, but it seems to work for most people so I'm afraid it's not likely we'll change it any time soon.

Gerhard66
G
Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162, Visits: 344
Why not simply set the default scroll position to the bottom?

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)SkyDemon Team (636K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.8K, Visits: 8.6K
Because then you'd need to scroll up to get to the most-frequently-accessed items in the list, such as waypoint creation and airfield information.
mapl99
m
Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)Forum Member (33 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6, Visits: 5
Gerhard66 - 2/25/2023 5:26:47 AM
Why not simply set the default scroll position to the bottom?

Or make it configurable. So everyone can decide which is best for him or her.

Gerhard66
G
Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (5.3K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162, Visits: 344
I understand Tims arguments. 
A solution could be to have separate scrolling areas, one for airspaces in „correct“ order and one for the additional information. 
But this construction would be even more confusing, especially on small screens. 
So I’m happy with the current implementation - as far as no one has a better idea. 

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search