“Pinned” is also used in the context of gnome-shell where you can pin applications to move them to the dash. As in they disappear from the app grid and are always shown in the dash. So maybe using a different term would be better to avoid inconsistencies? (Or change the term/behavior in gnome-shell)
Yeah, I agree. Also, I’ve noticed that GNOME Web uses a star icon but the tooltip says “add to bookmarks”. We’re probably gonna need coherent naming across GNOME for starred / bookmarked / pinned items.
Pinning is a really common term in UI. I don’t think this would cause confusion, especially because it serves basically the same function here.
Something like this, though “Suggested” implies more intelligence than that panel actually has. I think we should stick to “Recents”, or something similar. Also, “files” is redundant in the titles here, plus you are able to favorite/pin folders too.
Worst case scenario, it could be renamed to “move to dash” to avoid any potential misunderstandings.
I’m not sure “recents” would still be a good name, since that screen would show more than recents. But again, I know naming is important, but it’s really secondary to me.
But each favorite / starred / pinned folder would go to its own entry on the sidebar:
Or do you have something different in mind?
I wouldn’t overcomplicate it. Just merge starred and recents into one view. (The name we can discuss after having a design)
Wait, I’m not sure I’m following.
In that scenario… do bookmarks still exist as a separate thing, aside from starred / recents?
Or are they also merged?
I’m not sure I’m buying into this. The screenshot seems fine with 1 “pinned” item, but for those who actually are using Starred and may have many starred items, the Recent Files will be indirectly demoted.
Hi, Corey. What about my original proposal of simply merging Starred and Bookmarks, that left Recents aside? Would you be OK with that?
I meant that Bookmarks would exist as a separate thing.
Or, recents could be at the top, in an expander. So it only shows 1 row of recents by default, with an option to expand it and view all. (And of course it’d be always expanded if the user has no pins)
I don’t think that would be any simpler, then. Because we’d still have two separate bookmarking systems (bookmarks and starred) with a lot of overlap between them.
We would, but IIRC my proposal was not about simplifying these, simply making favorites more discoverable and useful.
There are a lot of directions this could go in, and none of them are objectively better than the other. I don’t think “simplifying” this would necessarily be ideal. AFAIK favorites were implemented as a stopgap between no tagging and full-on user-defined ones. Bookmarks are just pinning to the sidebar. I think both of these are useful and I have used both. It is certainly not “pointless duplication”. I agree that it’s not great having 5 different ways to organize your files, but that’s just what you’re going to get if you want any form of advanced organization (reinventing tags).
If we really want to explore this topic, we need to talk to users, look at what people are familiar with, what they expect and what other platforms are doing.
Trust me, I’ve thought about the concept of organizing files for a long time, probably way too much, and the more I do, the more I realize that all of these features are just band-aids on top of band-aids. Removing one and putting a different one somewhere else is not the solution to anything, especially if users are already using them. I bet they would get quite angry.
And to this point, yes. But so does bookmarking/favoriting and putting those in a folder called “Important”. Or symlinking them there. Unless you start from a very robust tagging system, this is going to happen. You can’t solve this in a hierarchical file manager besides just not offering any of these features.
This topic was automatically closed 45 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.