Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bug: Thick wires hide the ports and make hovering for the port tooltip impossible #7

Open
IAmMarcelJung opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@IAmMarcelJung
Copy link

IAmMarcelJung commented Mar 8, 2024

We've previously talked about how the wire overlaps the port both visually and logically (so that the port tooltip is not shown while hovering over the overlap). This problem gets a bit worse if the wire width is increased. If It is set to the maximum, the port is completely covered by the wire and no information about the port can be obtained:
image

To solve this, changing the thickness of the wire should not change its length, so that at least half of the port is still visible and therefore hoverable and selectable. As also discussed before, it could be tried to let the wire end at 1/4 of the port instead of in the middle. I remember something like this was tried already but did not look good, but I can't remember exactly what was tried.

Maybe also somebody else has an idea what would be the best approach?

@IAmMarcelJung
Copy link
Author

I just found out that letting the wire end at 1/4 might not be a good idea, since then the junction of two wires would look strange, since they would no longer overlap. Therefore the approach with preserving the wire length should be preferred.

@JakobTernes
Copy link
Collaborator

Im not really happy with the current solution for making wires appear thicker. I think of it as a temporary solution that might help with things like documentation.
As a proper solution, I would suggest that highlighted wires are simply rendered thicker at larger distance, but look like normal wires at closer inspection (where no additional thickness should be needed anyways).

@IAmMarcelJung
Copy link
Author

This sounds awesome! I would prefer this greatly over the manual approach if it works nicely! 😃 However it sounds more complicated to implement, but I cannot judge this since I'm not familiar with those things.

@JakobTernes JakobTernes added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants