Yes, I thought your question was about filtering the actual events, not a concern about the way they were arranged on the page. I misunderstood. When you select "Group By", you are grouping by a type of entity. You will see all of those entities listed whether they have associated events or not. This is a very handy way to quickly assign entities to events with just the click of the mouse. Perhaps what would satisfy your request/concern would be a button to optionally hide entity names that didn't match the current filter view? I don't think there is any way to do that now. I'm sure Jess will let you know if I'm wrong. Could you accomplish the same thing visually by grouping by category instead of by person?
" Perhaps what would satisfy your request/concern would be a button to optionally hide entity names that didn't match the current filter view?" That is exactly what I would need ;) I can group by category, but I would not see who did the painting or the play. I would just see "Hamlet" or "MacBeth" without knowing who did what. The example here was with within the art category, but I see it in a broader way. For instance, I would also want to do a timeline showing every major battle (category) grouped by person. Maybe working with tags instead? I'm really new with Aeon and maybe my project is way too ambitious ;)
filter by category. Not grouped. Difficult to see who did what. with a glance [Capture d’écran 2017-10-30 à 18](//muut.com/u/aeontimeline/s3/:aeontimeline:6Xup:capturedecran20171030a18.02.21.png.jpg)
I do think that you will need to use tags and you may consider creating some custom entity types. When writing fiction, we often use the "story arcs" to tie a group of events together that may not be related otherwise. For example you might want to group everything related to the Renaissance or the Napoleonic era. I'm not sure what your project is exactly, but one thing that is helpful is to realize that Aeon Timeline is primarily about the events and when they occurred. In other words, "what" and "when". The "who" and "where" aspects are somewhat second class citizens from an AT2 perspective and are handled through entities. Events have far more power/capabilities in AT2 than entities.
By "grouping", do you mean the parent/child thing?
No, I was just referring to the "Group By" option for the Timeline and Relationship views. One little thing I noticed was that the last screen shot you listed was a timeline view, whereas the others were relationship view. Timeline view shows very little detail unless you expand the events.
You can eliminate items from a filter by selecting "Not" instead of "Has".
Well.. Maybe eventually we will be able to optionally hide entity names that didn't match the current filter view in the future :) But I think AT2 can still work for my thing. Basically, I'm an history buff and I want to be able to see everything on a timeline and add entries as I read a new book. I want to see how things relate to each others and compare timeline by "theme" For instance, for the purpose of trying the software and see if it can work for me, I created the categories for big empires. Here, you see Ottomans, Byzance and Hungary. The fall of Constantinople is in the Ottoman and Byzance categories because the Ottomans conquered the city from the Byzantine empire. [Capture d’écran 2017-10-30 à 18](//muut.com/u/aeontimeline/s3/:aeontimeline:Lufw:capturedecran20171030a18.25.57.png.jpg) Also: I don't see the title name on the blue line in the Byzance category because it start outside of my view. Anyway I can make it appear no matter what? :)
Did you see what I wrote above?
Heya, Craig. I don't think Francis is having trouble controlling what events he sees. The issue is with empty entity rows cluttering the view when using "Group By". The empty rows mean you have to do a lot of scrolling if you have a lot of entities, regardless of how you filter. Francis, there isn't any way to control subtle positioning in the event names. That layout is automated and tries to be smart as you zoom and move around the timeline. Your project sounds quite interesting.
Craig, your screen shot was grouped by arc. If you had 100 people entities and you did a group by people, you'd have 101 rows in your display (100 people plus the "No Person" row.) Potentially you could have two or three matches in your filter, which could separated by 20 or 30 empty rows.
Okay, this is nowhere near what I thought we were talking about and I no longer understand the thread, so I'm going to bow out. Gracefully, of course.
Hehe, it took me a few rounds to sort it out, too. You're the #1 most helpful AT2 customer in this forum. You're allowed to miss one now and then. :-)
No problems Craig. Almost everyone else suggested this first and the way I want to use AT2 is unconventional :) Razyr: My project is geeky. Really geeky ;)
razyr - "You're the #1 most helpful AT2 customer in this forum." Au contraire, mon ami - that honor goes to you. Kind of you to say, though.
Update: Being able to sort by characters and see it in a better way would have been nice, but it's not a "must have" feature". After YEARS of looking for a way to do this, AT2 really seems to be it. By using parent/child and "based on", I can really visualise the timeline, how things relate and how they cascade. Here is the start of the Barbarian migration (that will make the romans fall). The Huns arrive in Europe, forcing the Vandales to move into Roman territory (Gaul, then Spain (Espagne)), then crossing Gibraltar to Africa, then take Carthage to settle there for 98 years before falling to the Byzantine empire. [Barbarian](//muut.com/u/aeontimeline/s3/:aeontimeline:LQyN:barbarian.png.jpg)
And how the barbarian fits into the fall of the western part of the Roman Empire :) [Roman](//muut.com/u/aeontimeline/s3/:aeontimeline:QnHU:roman.png.jpg)
Hi guys, Interesting discussion. In version 1, we allowed users to toggle groups (called Arcs at the time) on and off, removing them completely from view when they were off. Unfortunately, this led to a large number of support requests along the lines of "where did my events go?" and "Aeon Timeline lost all my data you useless bastards!!!" etc. The data was always there in the final, but the arcs were hidden and there was no visual indicator to show that. So when we did version 2, I made it so the groups collapse rather than hide altogether, so that there was at least that visual indicator to show there was additional data available. It can create a bit of a nasty pile up when you have them all collapsed and half your screen is still filled with the names of the collapsed items, so there is definitely further improvements to be made here. As I have been working on the iOS interface recently, which by necessity of the small screen behaves in a different way, I have been thinking about improvements that can be made to both versions. On those screens, the vertical scr olling becomes impossible to navigate effectively, so I have limited it to showing a single group, with a fast and easy way to access the different groups and choose what to show. In effect, it acts like a very fast filter on Entity. Now that I have seen that in action, I like it a lot, but there is obviously an extra benefit with the Desktop being able to stack groups on top of each other and make visual comparisons. This gets hard with lots of collapsed events between your views, or any time one of the groups is vertically tall such that only one group can be viewed at a time. So what I am thinking will be the long term path will be to move towards the iOS model of having a single group only, but then stacking multiple "views" on top of each other in a split view. This would allow the user to choose which groups to view in each split. The splits would have synchronised horizontal scrolling, but independent vertical scrolling, so you can scroll up and down in one without affecting the other... this would make it much easier to visually compare sets of data because you won't be inadvertently scrolling them off the screen all the time. It may even be possible to have one split showing the Timeline View and another showing Relationship view at the same time. Anyway, all of that may make more sense after the iOS version is released, or it may make no sense at all until I have implemented what I am thinking about and uncovered all the flaws. Either way, interested to hear further thoughts or comments... the usability around this is certainly an area I will be thinking heavily about once the iOS version is out. Matt
I think a reasonable compromise, even in the short term, might be to just bubble the events with filter matches to the top of the list. As soon as you split a view, you are automatically cutting the amount of displayable information in half. One of the recurring themes here in the forum is, "How can I remove wasted space and display more rows?". I wouldn't want to see the UI changed so that I have to split my view because I"m using filters. It seems a bit silly that users are essentially complaining that "the filters are working". The whole point is to remove extraneous information from a view. Rather than stacking the groups, could they appear in tabs? Just thinking out loud if there might be a way other than vertical stacking. I'll be interested to see what you decide.
I must admit my initial thoughts were not so much based on filters as general usage when there is a lot more info on the screen. But some of the issues are related, even if they come from different perspectives. You are right that in the case of filters having a fast way to view only the relevant groups is a necessary aim - and something I will have to give further thought to. In what I am describing, the vertical splits would be resizable, and you could add several, to avoid wasted space. The aim is actually to avoid wasted space. Because in a large group, you often end up with something like the following stretching down the screen until you need vertical scrolling to view it all. This can also create a lot of empty space, as when the chain stretches far enough to the right, the space underneath Group A can take up several screens and be completely empty. --- *** GROUP 1 *** Event A Event B Event C Event D Event E Event F Event G Event H Event I ... etc. *** GROUP 2 *** Event X Event Y Event Z --- At that point, it becomes difficult or impossible to compare events between two groups in the current setup. Assuming your screen is only *6 events tall*, you have the option to view either this: --- *** GROUP 1 *** Event A Event B Event C Event D Event E Event F --- Or this: --- *** GROUP 1 *** Event G Event H Event I *** GROUP 2 *** Event X Event Y Event Z --- Or collapse group 1 and see this: --- *** GROUP 1 *** *** GROUP 2 *** Event X Event Y Event Z --- But you can never see and compare Event A and Event X/Y/Z on the screen at the same time. What I am suggesting is that we allow each group to be scrolled independently vertically, such that it initially looks like: --- *** GROUP 1 *** Event A Event B Event C *** GROUP 2 *** Event X Event Y Event Z --- But you can independently scroll the top group and see this: --- *** GROUP 1 *** Event D Event E Event F *** GROUP 2 *** Event X Event Y Event Z --- This would at least allow you to bring anything into view that you want to for those comparisons. Anyway, food for thought. I suspect I need to implement it to find out the gremlins and whether the idea works or becomes a painful mess.