6 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
dtourolle	af89433aee	Offer the lens profile as a tick box, since applying it silently reads as absent ... The develop panel's Optics group is three manual sliders: distortion, chromatic aberration and lens vignetting. The automatic correction was already there — the file's EXIF lens is matched against the bundled Lensfun database on open and the coefficients are fanned out to all three — but nothing in the interface said so except a line of grey text under the camera reading "· corrected", and there was no way to decline it. From the outside that is indistinguishable from the feature not existing, which is how it was read. `dr-lens` states the rule this breaks: an automatic correction that silently does nothing is worse than one the user can see is unavailable. The caption satisfied the letter of it and not the point — a photographer looking for "apply the lens profile" found three sliders and no switch. So the profile is now a control. It is a capability rather than a flag on the session, because everything a photographer sets travels one road: the capability list feeds the generated panel, `Preset` captures it, the sidecar stores it and the undo stack replays it. A bool on the side would have needed adding to each of those four by hand and would have been forgotten in at least one — which is exactly how the mask stack came to be missing from the history. It is on by default, which is what `switch_on` is for: the coefficients are a measurement of the lens that took the photograph, so accepting them is neutral and declining them is the edit. The sidecar therefore stores nothing for the ordinary case and the correction still happens. The switch appears only where a profile was matched. A tick box on a photograph whose lens the database has never heard of would be a control that looks available and does nothing, which is the failure the rule above names rather than an instance of following it — those photographs are told "· no profile" in words instead, and one whose box is unticked now says "· profile off", which is a third fact and not either of the other two. Two things had to be built underneath. `ParamKind::Bool` was in the core's closed enum and mapped to a row kind here, and had no control behind it in `adjust.slint`: a parameter declaring itself a switch was flattened into a row that drew nothing at all. Nothing shipped had one until now, so the gap cost nothing and was invisible. And `Check` self-toggled, which is right for a settings page that owns its value and wrong for a panel row that is a view of the edit graph — the click would have answered by replacing the binding with a literal, and the next undo or pasted preset would have moved the value with the tick left where the finger put it. It now takes `controlled`, and the generated row uses it. The manual sliders are unchanged and still trim whatever the profile leaves, so switching it off is "correct this by hand" rather than "stop correcting".	2026-09-07 00:27:47 +02:00
dtourolle	3994caba12	Write down the develop gestures, since only their author knew them ... FR-UI-4 says a gesture with no visible counterpart is a feature only its author knows about, and the vocabulary the application actually publishes had two sections in it — the library grid and people. Develop had none. Every one of its gestures was documented in the comment beside the `TouchArea` that implements it, which is where the previous sixteen were before this scanner existed, and unreachable to anybody not reading the source. Thirteen now carry tags: magnify by pinch or wheel, pan a magnified frame, fit and 1:1, hold to see the original, sample a neutral, undo and redo, step through the folder, reset one control, show or hide a mask layer, choose a group of adjustments, and copy and paste the settings. Each has a pointer and a touch route, so none of them is keyboard-only. Three bindings were genuinely missing and are added here rather than merely described. Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V for the settings clipboard, which the Settings panel's own comment has claimed existed for as long as the panel has and nothing bound; and [ and ] to step through the adjustment groups. The groups are whatever the operation set declares itself to be about, so there are as many as the pipeline has and no key can name one of them — stepping is the binding that survives a node being added, and "everything" is part of the cycle rather than a way out of it. Two are described and not bound. Resetting a control from the keyboard and toggling a mask layer from the keyboard both need a notion of which control or layer has focus, and the generated panel has none — the rows are a model the repeater rebuilds, and inventing a focus ring for them is a larger change than a keyboard shortcut. Both are reachable by pointer and by finger, and the tags say so rather than promising a key that is not there.	2026-09-06 19:01:52 +02:00
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5	8e4befa727	Say what each control is, so a screen reader can use one ... The whole interface carried five accessible-* declarations in 14,482 lines of markup, all of them on a single row of the colour mixer, and nothing said so. Every other control — every button, every tick-box, every chip, and the slider the develop panel builds thirty-six of for the mixer alone — reached AT-SPI and TalkBack as an unnamed rectangle. NFR-A11Y-2 is not a polish item for a user in that position; it is whether the application can be used at all. The annotations go on the shared components rather than on the screens, which is the same argument widgets.slint was written to make one layer down: a control named where it is used is a control unnamed everywhere it is used next. Twelve components now declare a role, a name and — where the control does something — the action assistive technology invokes to do it. Three screens were touched, and only where the component could not know the answer. SliderTrack is the one that mattered most and the one that could not be fixed from inside itself. It is handed four numbers and knows nothing about what they mean, so it takes a `label` and a formatted `readout` and every wrapper passes down what it was already drawing. A test asserts that every instantiation does, because a track added without one announces "slider, 0.35" and looks perfectly correct in a screenshot. It also gains increment, decrement and set-value. A slider that can only be dragged is a slider a pointer is a modifier for, which is the objection ui-navigation D-N2 makes about hover-only affordances with the argument run one step further; these three are what a screen reader drives a slider with, and they commit as well as change — one nudge is a whole gesture, so a caller that persists on `committed` must hear about it. Two decisions worth recording because the obvious alternative is wrong: `active` on Button and IconButton is deliberately not announced from the component. It says a toggle is on and says nothing about whether a control that is *off* is a toggle at all, so announcing it would report every button in the application as an unpressed toggle. The four call sites that mean a toggle say so themselves, which Slint permits because the role is inherited. SwatchSlider's row-level role is removed rather than kept. It was the one control that had a label, and now that the track underneath it has one too the two would nest — a slider inside a slider, the outer holding the value and the inner holding the actions that can change it. The row stands down and hands the same strings to the control that owns the gesture. The test reads the markup the way darkroom-android's manifest test reads its XML: there is no accessibility tree without a window, so what it defends is the failure that actually happens — a role or a name lost in a refactor, which compiles, renders identically, and is invisible to everyone not using a screen reader. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-30 10:22:32 +02:00
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5	ef07e6ca3e	Give the canvas tools a rail of their own, and the column one width ... Crop, Local and Repair were chips at the head of the develop column, sharing a row with the adjustment groups and told apart from them by the shape of their highlight. Three things followed from that, and only the last is cosmetic: the column closes, so the way out of a mode went away with the way in — hence the duplicate "Done Cropping" over the canvas; the chips are generated from the operation set, so the widest thing in the sidebar was a row nobody had chosen the contents of; and a mode and a filter are different kinds of state wearing one control. They are a fixed 60px rail down the left now, generated from a single table in toolrail.slint. A tool is one row of it plus a drawing plus a ViewMode variant; nothing in app.slint is touched to add one. What is left of the strip is the group filters, so it is GroupStrip. The column stops measuring itself. Every panel published a content-width and declared it as min-width, and the column took the largest — which spent the photograph's pixels on whatever happened to be widest, and moved the image sideways when switching tools swapped one set of panels for another. It is panel-width now, one number in style.yaml. That number is 360 and it is measured, not picked: the contents report a minimum of 344 in every mode, and they do not compress below it because a Text that does not elide reports the same minimum as preferred. 320 was tried and sliced Paste down the middle. The Flickable's viewport is floored at the layout's minimum rather than its preferred width for the same reason — content that is never told how much room it has cannot adapt to having less. Removing the eight content-width declarations repairs three comments an earlier edit had spliced sentences into. The raw histogram's note on keeping its hint short is rewritten rather than dropped: an over-long hint no longer widens the column, it pushes the column's minimum past the width it has and clips the panel, which makes that constraint sharper rather than obsolete. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-30 09:59:50 +02:00
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5	ff6c313bab	Wrap the chip rows, so one six-choice parameter stops sizing the sidebar ... The develop column asked for 482px. Every comment in it, a dozen of them, describes it as a 280px column — and on a tablet it was taking 40% of the screen from the photograph it exists to serve. Measured rather than guessed, because none of it is visible in the source: the column takes the widest width any panel declares, `AdjustPanel` wanted 482 of it, its rows wanted 458, and after the 44px scroll gutter the widest single row was 414. That row is `film_sim`'s `format` — six film formats from 35mm to 8x10, laid out by `Segmented` as six 64px chips in a `HorizontalLayout` that cannot wrap. 6 x 64 + 5 x 6 = 414, exactly. Nothing about that is the film simulation's fault. An operation declares its parameters and the panel decides how to draw them (FR-DEV-3a), so a node is entitled to offer six choices; it is the drawing that has to cope. Any future operation with a five-choice enum would have done the same thing, silently, to every screen in the application. `ChipGrid` is the general answer: chips placed by index arithmetic inside a plain `Rectangle`, wrapping at a column count, declaring a width that depends on the columns rather than on the number of choices. `Segmented` takes a `columns` property and uses it when asked — zero, one row however many chips, stays the settings page's behaviour, where the page is full-width and reading the alternatives side by side is the whole argument for chips over a dropdown. The generated enum rows and the curve-channel picker now wrap at three, and the crop ratio chips use the shared grid instead of the private copy of it they shipped with last week. The column measures 351 now, down from 482, and what sets it is the mode strip rather than a parameter — which is a control the user chose to have on screen rather than an accident of one node's variant list. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-29 19:16:43 +02:00
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5	0a331c717e	Give the controls a vocabulary, and let a node ask for one ... widgets.slint set the rule — screens consume components, and a bare `Theme.*` at a call site means a component is missing — and it set it for chrome only. The controls never got the same treatment, so they were written wherever they were first needed and copied from there. **The slider was private to the develop panel.** `SliderTrack`, with the fifty-line preamble explaining how it wrests a drag away from a Flickable, lived inside adjust.slint and no other screen could reach it. It shows: export quality is a 1-to-100 value, and the settings page offered a free-text box for it, with the range written in a hint and enforced nowhere. `to-float()` answers 0 for anything it cannot parse, so a typo saved a quality of 0 and the page displayed the 0 back as though it had been asked for. The tick-box was written twice, in launch.slint and settings.slint, from the same 18px box and the same handler; the second carried a comment deferring the lift until a third caller appeared. The label-and-hint header was written three times inside settings.slint alone. controls.slint is the input layer beside widgets.slint's chrome layer, and the constraint that makes it reusable is that **nothing in it knows about `ParamRow`** — that struct is the develop panel's flattening of the capability model, and a control that imported it could only ever be used by the develop panel. The primitives take plain numbers; the ParamRow-shaped wrappers stay in the panel that owns the model. 658 lines came out of the three screens. `SliderRow` is the slider-plus-number-box ARCH §4.3 names as the pointer presentation of a bounded scalar, and quality is its first adopter. It commits on gesture end rather than on every movement, because the settings page saves to disk on change and a two-second drag is a couple of hundred writes where a text field committed once. The develop panel keeps the live stream — that is what its pipeline is for — so `SliderTrack` now reports both. **The other half is the descriptor.** FR-DEV-3a and ARCH §4.3a already specify more than was built: an ordered preference list of widgets rather than one, the demands a widget makes, and kinds beyond scalar and bool. - `Presentation.widgets` is now a list, walked by `choose`, falling back to plain sliders. Falling off the end is not an error, and there is a test asserting an operation asking only for an unimplemented widget still yields one control per parameter. - `WidgetDemand` carries what a widget inherently needs — two-dimensional dragging, precise pointing — and no pixels, breakpoints or platform names. - `WidgetKind` grows to the specified set. There is deliberately no `Colour` *kind*: a colour is three numbers, and a value type that is not an `f32` would reach through the graph, the uniform block and the sidecar format to buy what `ColourWheel` over three scalars already describes. Every widget here is a hint over ordinary scalars, which is what keeps the fallback honest. - `ParamKind::Enum` is the one new shape, and it fits because a variant index is exact in binary32. `kind: enum` with a `variants:` list works in `ops/*.yaml`, so a node declaring one gets a segmented control with no UI file edited — which is the promise ops/mod.rs already makes. The panel's dispatch was duplicated: a lone parameter and a grouped one each wrote out their own list of kinds, so `enum` would have had to be added twice and a kind added to one would appear or vanish depending on how many parameters its operation happened to declare. `ParamControl` is now the only such chain. `rows_from` is free-standing rather than a method, which is what lets the FR-DEV-3c acceptance test requirements.md asks for actually be written: an operation the frontend has never heard of, appearing in a generated panel, with no GPU in sight. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-16 23:21:35 +02:00