Folder Format hierarchy

Help & Support
1

Continued from another thread...

Folder formats seem super powerful to me but my assumptions with folder format setup doesn't always accomplish my desired results. So I'm curious to learn more (assuming others are too) about how to use them properly with some discussion.

OVERVIEW
I think it's about user assumptions vs design rules. As a programmer I can appreciate competing design considerations between flexibility and speed. Find one format and stop looking to implement immediately is one approach. Another would start with a basic format and keep building on it until all applicable formats have been included and THEN implement the final combined format...a hierarchy structure of sorts...but a more time-consuming method.

As I became more aware and familiar with folder formats I jumped to assumptions. For example, certain formats like User Default, Local & Network Drives, and This PC "force" the use of their Columns and Grouping definition. Content Type, Path, wildcard and some Folder Type formats give the user the option to turn OFF the Columns and Grouping definition. That gave me the impression "forced" formats are the starting point, the foundation, and the others may or may not exist to supplement or even override the "forced" formats. Again it seemed like the perfect setup for a hierarchy implementation.

Of course it's not just Columns and Grouping, it's filters, tab color and Labels, etc. It made sense that very few formats could address Columns definitions for nearly everything with a few exceptions here and there. So I started to create Path and wildcard formats to supplement...with filters, tab color and Labels mostly and making sure Columns and Grouping was turned OFF for each of them when I did not want an override. For example, my wildcard formats simply control tab color.

But then I noticed what I saw wasn't matching my assumptions. One Path/wildcard format was implemented but Content Type was missing/ignored. Another example, I've setup a Content Type + Path + wildcard combo but I never see that complete combo implemented (padlock).

I get the impression, with the FIRST Path/wildcard format found, the format search ends. Any other formats are ignored. If true, that's a "fast" design. But if that's the case, why give the option to turn OFF Columns and Grouping? Because if turned OFF, the column defs need to come from one of the other formats, possibly one where Columns and Grouping is "forced". You can't assume User Default is the only proper format to use for Columns because that's why Folder Types and Content Types exist...alternatives to the default.

Path/wildcard formats would need to contain redundant defs if other formats are ignored and you'd need to create many more Path formats compared to what could be accomplished with a supplemental hierarchy design.

So that's my confusion. I'm hoping this could be a discussion to inform and benefit others too...because Folder Formats are really awesome and very helpful to many with clear understanding of the rules. Sorry for the verbose post and thanks in advance.

2

The Folder Formats: Detailed Guide FAQ explains in detail how the folder formats system works (or at least, it's meant to!)

3

Thanks so much Jon. I've seen the guide before and thought I'd read it all. Apparently not. Very helpful.

I've gone through the folder formats and made changes such as turning on "Include columns from other matching formats" and "Use as the default format for all sub-folders". That made a big difference. I now get 3 and sometimes 4 formats listed by padlock. Definitely an improvement.

Understanding the hierarchy explained in the Guide, I still have Labels or Tab Color sometimes missing. Not sure if I'm still missing something.

For example, I've got a folder with backup files on drive E. Content Type controls the columns and Labels. A wildcard format (^E.) controls the tab color for drive E. Columns and Grouping is turned OFF in wildcard format. The displayed columns are correct but sorting is wrong (from Content Type). Tab Color is correct (from wildcard) but Labels are missing (from Content Type). I've tried Labels turned on and off in wildcard format...doesn't matter...Labels from Content Type don't show up.

What do you think I should check? Thank you very much for your help.

4

Any ideas about why tab color and Labels wouldn't be impemented from the formats involved? Something I should do or are you checking out something on your end?

5

Once a format has matched, subsequent formats are only checked for additional columns they can add (assuming the 'Use columns from other matching formats' option is on).

The system is hierarchical only in the sense that there's a defined order that formats are checked in. It doesn't suck bits and pieces from all the different formats like you're describing.

So, for example, if a wildcard format matches, then everything from that format will be used, and then, only if the 'Use columns from other matching formats' flag is turned on, subsequent matching formats (including content type) will be checked for additional columns.

6

Regarding the tab coloring, I'd also like that to be disconnected from the format in use. When the "colored tabs" feature was introduced I expected to be able to color the tabs which are network locations or which are drive c, d or any usb-connected drive etc.. It's a bit off from practical use for me. For me the current format in use, indicated by a tab color is of rare interest. The format can change very quickly from path-format to content and can be altered by toggling columns/viewmode etc., so connecting the tab color to that does not make much sense currently for me.

So I agree with ankor in some parts of his findings, others may find the current tab coloring system useful of course.
I just wanted to share my view on this and maybe emphasize some thoughts on how to enhance this. o)

7

If you want that, a script is probably the best approach, since they can set tab colors and are independent of other things you might be using folder formats for which conflict.

8

I agree with much of what tbone offered. Folder formats is a great feature but not just for columns.

The hierarchy that starts with specific (Path) and potentially drilling in further allows for defining the info on all those folder format tabs ONCE at the "right" level. If you drill in looking for additional formats, you collect more info such as columns but not just columns. As tbone points out, tab color isn't just about the folder, but by being able to define it at various levels allows it to have different scope and meaning...and defined ONCE.

No need to write scripts when you already have a color edit control ready to let you pick. Like tbone, I wanted the tab color to represent the drive and it was really easy with a wildcard folder format...ONCE per drive. Same with Labels and filters. Perhaps the tab color at the Path level shouldn't get overridden as you drill in PERHAPs...but an empty tab color certainly can gain a color say at the Content Type or wildcard format as you drill in. You already have the pieces in place. Build a list of Labels just as you build a list of columns from various format defs. Just allow the rest of the def to be used and brought into the final implementation of the folder format. Really, really powerful!!

Folder formats is a brilliant structure...begging :slight_smile:...for a little more of its potential IMHO. And I think other users will love the hierarchy as their chance to define their needs at appropriate levels of format def to avoid having to keep repeating certain parts of the def or having to resort to writing scripts. It's already there....waiting.

I'm really excited about folder formats in case you couldn't tell :slight_smile:

9

Did not know scripts are able to set the tab color, I will investigate and see how it turns out! Thanks for pointing that out! o)
Setting the tab color via path/wildcard format would be more straight forward, but this is a "first world problem" I guess. o)

10

You can do that, but it sounds like you want to avoid changing the folder format for those folders, so another approach is required.

11

Yes, I meant "Setting the tab color via path/wildcard format would be more straight forward.. if it could be inherited separately". o)

No complaints, all the opposite. You keep putting big amount of work and thoughts into the current version, even though it's been released some days ago. Some people would sit and rest for a year after a new major version has seen the light. o) As busy as you go, don't forget to schedule some holidays soon and have some relaxation after the peak. I suggest going some place where there's no keyboard, compiler and virtual machine around! o)

12

[quote="tbone"]Yes, I meant "Setting the tab color via path/wildcard format would be more straight forward.. if it could be inherited separately". o)

No complaints, all the opposite. You keep putting big amount of work and thoughts into the current version, even though it's been released some days ago.[/quote]

+1

I've said it elsewhere...folder formats is fantastic but it stops short of implementing inheritance except for columns. The pieces are already there and it would be more powerful to consider other portions of the format def for inheritance like tab color, Labels, sorting...allowing users the ability to establish definitions at the level where it fits best instead of forcing the details to reside in Path/wildcard formats. It's awesome and that would be even more awesome!!! Great, great work!!!