Color Coding Of File Names And Other Applications

Discussion & Support for xplorer² professional

Moderators: fgagnon, nikos, Site Mods

tb75252
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2010 Apr 27, 22:30

Color Coding Of File Names And Other Applications

Post by tb75252 »

I have Windows XP SP3 Pro.

I have not yet installed the trial version of x2 Pro and would appreciate the following clarifications before doing so.

Is the color coding of file names done with x2 Pro also visible when using other programs such as MS Word, MS Excel, or any other kind of software that allows to browse/open files?

Also, can I individually color files or do I always have to set some sort of filter that colors them as a batch?  In other words, if I have 10 Excel files and only want to color one of them, can that be done or x2 Pro will want to color them all the same way because they are Excel files?

Thanks.
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Re: Color Coding Of File Names And Other Applications

Post by kunkel321 »

tb75252 wrote:Is the color coding of file names done with x2 Pro also visible when using other programs such as MS Word, MS Excel, or any other kind of software that allows to browse/open files?
My understanding is: no.  x2 would have to "hack" Windows to do this, which it doesn't.
tb75252 wrote:Also, can I individually color files or do I always have to set some sort of filter that colors them as a batch?  In other words, if I have 10 Excel files and only want to color one of them, can that be done or x2 Pro will want to color them all the same way because they are Excel files?
The coloring has to be set to a rule.
There are tons of ways to specify rules though.
You could make a rule like:
-If name is "*.xls*"
-and Comment Field includes the string "color me."

Then, with your example, you choose the one xls you want colored and press <Alt>+Z.  A comment field would popup and you'd type "color me" and hit <Enter>.
User avatar
nikos
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 16297
Joined: 2002 Feb 07, 15:57
Location: UK

Post by nikos »

good idea about "color me" :)
if singleing out a file is all you want then instead of changing its color you can add it in the miniscrap pane (View menu) as a reminder to do something with it
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Re: Color Coding Of File Names And Other Applications

Post by kunkel321 »

Well Fooie  I just tried this idea of adding a font style with a string tag in the comments section...  It did work, but not as expected.

My long-standing color coding schema is to use non-bold, non-italic, blue font for Word, green for Excel, purple for Image files, etc.

I was hoping that I could add an additional rule:  If any file has "=bold" in the comments, then bold would be ADDED to the exsisting color.  The rules seem to be "exclusive" rather than "cumulative/additive though...  (One or the other, not both)  Maybe I'm doing it wrong(?)

Also: Please note my edit below  :)
kunkel321 wrote: Then, with your example, you choose the one xls you want colored and press <Alt>+Z.  A comment field would popup and you'd type "color me" and hit <Enter>.
Correction:  Enter the string into the Comment field, the <Tab><Enter>.   :wink:
Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4797
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Baile Átha Cliath

Post by Kilmatead »

As far as I know they are exclusive - but there's a "priority" to what is set as they are encountered in the list for any one object (filename) type if any of the rules are "Generic": for instance, a rule with added (possibly contradictory) "conditions" must be placed in the list above the generic rule, so for your example:

You need two separate rules for each colour, one for Bold and one for Normal, but as they both define a "*.doc" object file (or whatever) the Bold one has extra rules (i.e. conditions that are not always met), it must be in the list above the Normal one (using the little positional arrows in the 'Filters' dialogue) or else it will never be applied.

Image

In other words Specific comes before Generic, as whichever comes first defines the setting for that object.

The only way around this is to have each rule be very specific:

"Doc" + (logical 'AND') + Comment Includes "Bold" == Blue & Bold
"Doc" + (logical 'NOT') + Comment Includes "Bold" == Blue & Normal

...each one having to include the "Comment" check subrule - which can get very annoying if you want to branch out into more conditions, such as bold italics, or plain reversed background on the *.doc variations.  One colour with 4 variations can be a bugger to define properly.

Any of this make sense?  Forgive me for stating the obvious if you already figured that nonsense out for yourself - I used to keep getting caught out by the "generic" vs. "specific" rules, so I went for the long explanation. :D

(An example of multiple variations would be if a DOC was intended for your wife but not for your boss; your wife and daughter but not for your priest; your priest but not your rabbi or your wife but maybe your daughter.  But as they are all DOC's you still want them all to be Blue.)

But it's easier to be a single, unemployed, non-denominational agnostic. :wink:
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

It's a Feature Request now. :)

Post by kunkel321 »

Hey thanks for the thoughful response Kilmatead!

Indeed this is new info to me.  It makes sense though.
I will register this as a feature request...

When picking text attributes for the coloring rule, it would IMHO be great of x2 ingored any text properties that are not explicitly assigned.

I suppose this would be heavier on system resources, because even when a rule is met, x2 would have to continue looking at all of the rules for every file(?)   Worth it though(?)

Does what I'm saying even make sense??

PS: My rules are all atheists and Buhddists...
Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4797
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Baile Átha Cliath

Re: It's a Feature Request now. :)

Post by Kilmatead »

kunkel321 wrote:When picking text attributes for the coloring rule, it would IMHO be great of x2 ignored any text properties that are not explicitly assigned.

I suppose this would be heavier on system resources, because even when a rule is met, x2 would have to continue looking at all of the rules for every file(?)
Well, they are already "continually looked at" - how else would a colour-coding change immediately (upon Refresh at least) when its conditions change?

Logically speaking, simply checking for a filetype (*.doc) and having no "extra" rules is a type of explicit definition, because that means "assign colour no matter what" - but I suppose a condition could arise where the rule attributes would contradict each other, so then we'd be questioning Nikos' sense of "what should take priority" (as we all do anyway :wink:) - in other words we'd end up with what we have now where priority is determined by filter position.

As long as all filter rules behave the same (outside of colour-coding as well, i.e., file selection) the system works.  It just means we sometimes have to define extra (superficially "unnecessary") rules to get what we want.  But look beyond the superficial and they become necessary - so that's the way it is.

What you want is cumulative ruling - which might as well be scripting for all intents and purposes.  x2 in Nikos' vision doesn't seem to be designed for that.

Logic is a funny thing that way, as exampled by "The Golden Rule" of reciprocity: Do unto others as you would have done unto you: This seems like a great idea until you meet a masochist.  :shock: Think about it...

Do Buddhists have rules other than adherence to scepticism and friendliness to creepy-crawlies and beasties in the wild?

(I'm beginning to see why the x2 manual is a massive tome of the arcane and the enlightened. :D)
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Re: It's a Feature Request now. :)

Post by kunkel321 »

I suppose I’m assuming that x2 stops when it gets to a rule.  I’m not a programmer, but I think C++ stands for  “Complicated+Confusing+Confounding.”  I imagine there’s a line of code that says, “Keep looping through these rules until you find one that is true, then apply the text properties and stop.”  
For my example I’ll stop using the string-in-comments-tag idea and choose some things that I’d be more likely to use…
Word Rule:  If Named  *.doc*, Then Text color  = blue
Excel Rule: If Named *.xls*, Then Text color = green
Week Young Rule: If Not Modified date within the last 7 days(s), Then Text = Italic.
Is Large Rule: If Size value larger than 200K, Then Text = Bold face.
My theoretical files are this:
Report1.doc, 150K, Mod today.
Report1Charts.xls, 850K, Mod today.
ResearchPaper.doc, 1200K, Mod 2 years ago.
ResearchStatistics.xls, 850K, Mod 2 years ago.
BlogArticle.doc, 1200K, Mod last month.
SimpleNumberTable.xls, 199K, Mod last month.
SomeOldTextFile.txt, 23K, Mod last year.
Some newTextFile.txt, 23K, Mod 2 days ago.

So with the above order of rules we have:
Report1.doc
Report1Charts.xls
ResearchPaper.doc
ResearchStatistics.xls
BlogArticle.doc
SimpleNumberTable.xls
SomeOldTextFile.txt
Some newTextFile.txt

Presumably x2 is checking Report.doc and stopping once it gets a "hit" with the first rule.  Either that or Word Rule might be forcing ALL text properties, including Italics = No and Bold = No.

My guess is that stoping once it gets a "hit" is more efficient to the overall performance of x2....   So I'm also guessing there'd be a small performance cost if x2 were to take Report.doc and apply Word Rule, but ALSO let Italics = Undetermined and Bold = Undetermined, THEN look for additional rules....  We'd get:

Report1.doc
Report1Charts.xls
ResearchPaper.doc
ResearchStatistics.xls
BlogArticle.doc

SimpleNumberTable.xls
SomeOldTextFile.txt

Some newTextFile.txt

Kilmatead wrote:Do Buddhists have rules other than adherence to scepticism and friendliness to creepy-crawlies and beasties in the wild?
It all makes sense to me except the "reincarnation" part, which seems fanciful...  Past-life regression therapy???  Yea right.  Google "Elizabeth Loftus."
Kilmatead wrote:(I'm beginning to see why the x2 manual is a massive tome of the arcane and the enlightened. :D)
Agreed!   :lol:
Kilmatead wrote:Logic is a funny thing that way, as exampled by "The Golden Rule" of reciprocity: Do unto others as you would have done unto you: This seems like a great idea until you meet a masochist.  :shock: Think about it...
A sadist and a masochist meet in a gay bar and deside to go home together.  The masochist says to the sadist, "Beat me, beat me." The sadist says, "No..."  Muah ha ha ha .   :wink:
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Post by kunkel321 »

Hmmm...  My second colored example got jumbled up.  Bottom 3 files should be not bold.

Also note:  I think Italics are sortof ugly.  In reality I'd use a light background color instead :)
Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4797
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Baile Átha Cliath

Post by Kilmatead »

So basically you're saying you're too lazy to write 4 rules for each type instead of 1 rule per type + 2 overall Qualifiers.  So for Word and Excel now you write 8 rules in total but you only think you should write 4; and your justification is the ratio of numbers and arithmetic progression:

1 type of file == 3 rules instead of 4
2 types of file == 4 rules instead of 8
3 types of file == 5 rules instead of 12
4 types of file == 6 rules instead of 16
5 types of file == 7 rules instead of 20

How dare you suggest such a good idea!  Such a logical and time-saving thing!  Don't you know that you're supposed to suffer for your coloured italicised emboldened desires?  I mean think about it: if everyone felt free to just go around speaking out against injustice, collecting money for the poor, and helping little old ladies across the street, what kind of world would it be?  Bloody horrible, I declare.

Damn people and their excellent ideas.  People like you should be shunned.  This world is meant to be difficult and painful, not simple and efficient, don't you know that?

God forbid this sort of thing should be allowed to continue.

I might have to consider supporting it! :D

So, like, Elizabeth Loftus says I wasn't actually a Kalahari bushman in 1704 AD?  Or Constantine the Great's toe-nail clipper in 335 AD?  Or the kid who picked up Julius Caesar's faeces in 40 BC?  Or even that ugly bloke who died in a bar fight on the last day of World War II?

Well, she's no fun at all, is she? :wink: She's probably just jealous because she came back as a cold boring rock on the moon for 50,000 centuries and never really moved on, while the rest of us became colourful butterflies and birthday balloons.  No wonder she's a spoil-sport!
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Off topic by now :)

Post by kunkel321 »

Kilmatead wrote:Damn people and their excellent ideas.  People like you should be shunned.  This world is meant to be difficult and painful, not simple and efficient, don't you know that?
Its true it's true!!!  Ohhhh    Cantt tyyp .. Teears shortng ouut keebord..

Okay, I wiped and feel better now!
Kilmatead wrote:4 rules for each type instead of 1 rule per type + 2 overall Qualifiers.  So for Word and Excel now you write 8 rules in total but you only think you should write 4; and your justification is the ratio of numbers and arithmetic progression:

1 type of file == 3 rules instead of 4
2 types of file == 4 rules instead of 8
3 types of file == 5 rules instead of 12
4 types of file == 6 rules instead of 16
5 types of file == 7 rules instead of 20
I guess maybe I'm the masochist, since I spent the last 2 days digesting this part of your post...   :wink:

If comparing exclusive rules (ER) with cumulative rules (CR) we get
X(ER)==X(CR)^2, were X is the number of rules needed to ensure proper  display of a given file.  

PS: Its been a long time since I did any real algebra... The above formula may well be meaningless.
Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4797
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Baile Átha Cliath

Post by Kilmatead »

I was never very mathematically adept, so I'm afraid working out the ratio by formula is doing my head in.  I can assemble the Table with the details necessary to produce a Process, but I cannot deduce the Process from the Table.  That sort of thing was never my forté.

On the other hand, if you ever wanted to know the philosophical permutations of Raskolnikov's Guilt compared to Jean Valjean's acts of Redemption then I'm the man you call.  I could even assemble a pretty convincing dissertation on the subtleties of the Dissolution of History's Moral Imperative in the West and the implications therein - but no one ever wants to hear about that sort of thing. :sad: Everybody just wants to know tonight's Lotto numbers, or how long it will take before their car is fixed, or even more esoteric things like why didn't they marry the girl with sparkling eyes instead of the Evil Witch in the other room?  For some reason people think stuff like that is important.

In any event, your idea for Cumulative Rules for Colour Coding is a good idea - whether or not Nikos would care to implement it or come up with a good argument as to why it's impractical, is another story. Maybe colour coding isn't used that much by the majority of users?  I suppose it's more a matter that once you have set up the majority of your rules - you're done... how often do people regularly add more?

How many do most people have anyway?  I've got about 14 that I use all the time, but none are very complex, usually just differentiating file-types at a glance - and it's rare that I add more.

I've already used up the primary, secondary and tertiary colours which display nicely on a white and/or grey (inactive) background, so perhaps there are no more worlds to conquer? Unlike Alexander, I shall not shed a tear if I were condemned only to the list I have now for eternity.

But, there's always hope! (to torment us);

And dreams! (to condemn us);

And rope! (to hang us). :D
User avatar
nikos
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 16297
Joined: 2002 Feb 07, 15:57
Location: UK

Post by nikos »

cumulative rules have been recommended in the past but have been shelved. Color coding can be very time consuming as it is, if I add any extra complexity then it will be prohibitive for large folders
Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4797
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Baile Átha Cliath

Post by Kilmatead »

<Sigh>, and I was so enjoying my Sunday morning tea.
nikos wrote:...if I add any extra complexity then it will be prohibitive for large folders
Actually this is removing complexity, not adding to it as there would be fewer rules in the long run.  And besides, as colour coding can be turned on or off voluntarily, if the user has trouble they only have themselves and their pathetic hardware to blame.

I think the most I ever had at one time was 20 rules set, and never noticed any performance decrease.

Have pity on us poor (algebraically challenged) sinners.

I'm tired of using sticky-tape and coloured toilet-paper!  It's ruining my screen!

No sense of fun, you Greeks.  Your government takes my €1.2 Billion share of things and what do I get for it?  Images of you throwing fire on the news.  Pah.  Pah-pah-pah.

I guess the dream goes on.
User avatar
kunkel321
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 534
Joined: 2008 Jan 05, 18:58

Post by kunkel321 »

And so begins the Coalition for Cumulative Color Coding (C4)
:wink:  The idea may be sluggish, but the name is downright explosive!    :beer: