Diagram paste puts object at Z-order bottom

[Paolo F Cantoni]

One of our users came to me with a problem.  He's using large grouping elements (which are at the bottom - z-order).  However if he pastes  link from another diagram, it seems to get pasted at the bottom z-order - behind the big grouping element.  It took him a while to figure out what was going on as he could no longer see the pasted element and repasting it generated an error (that to him looked spurious!)

It seems to him (and me) that the pasting should paste at the top so you can see what you've just pasted.

I see this as a bug, but I thought I'd get opinions before posting a bug report.

Paolo

[Graham_Moir]

Agreed.  +1.

[qwerty]

+1

q.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Thanks,
Reported

Paolo

[Glassboy]

I think either this or the ability to lock elements in the z-order.

[RoyC]

I tend to agree with your request, but as a back-stop you could display the Modify Z Order dialog to establish that new elements are on the diagram and to bring them forward so that you can see them and work on them. This would be a useful tool to have open even if the paste did put the new element front, top and centre.

In the Help look for Modeling Tools > Building Models > Diagrams > Diagram Context Menu, and read about the Modify Element Z Order option.

[Glassboy]

Actually having thought about it it would be nice to have separate element, connector and decoration layers.

[qwerty]

If you classify non-browser-shown as decorator that would have funny effects on ADs (fork/join).

q.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

We seem to have gotten to the bottom of this.  The object being pasted was a (stereotyped) boundary.  By design, EA will place this at the bottom.  This would normally be OK, except, when the pasted item is hidden behind another item.

Our (my user and me) view is that since EA has decided to place it at the bottom it is EA's responsibility to check if the pasted item is (completely) hidden and alert the user to that effect (and perhaps offer remedial action).

Thoughts?
Paolo

[Glassboy]

We seem to have gotten to the bottom of this.  The object being pasted was a (stereotyped) boundary.  By design, EA will place this at the bottom.  This would normally be OK, except, when the pasted item is hidden behind another item.

Our (my user and me) view is that since EA has decided to place it at the bottom it is EA's responsibility to check if the pasted item is (completely) hidden and alert the user to that effect (and perhaps offer remedial action).

I think adding those kind of messages into EA's fairly dumb one layer z pile could easily just be more confusing.  If there's going to be a big code change to the app I'd rather see layers added than an attempt to make the pile less annoying.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

We seem to have gotten to the bottom of this.  The object being pasted was a (stereotyped) boundary.  By design, EA will place this at the bottom.  This would normally be OK, except, when the pasted item is hidden behind another item.

Our (my user and me) view is that since EA has decided to place it at the bottom it is EA's responsibility to check if the pasted item is (completely) hidden and alert the user to that effect (and perhaps offer remedial action).

I think adding those kind of messages into EA's fairly dumb one layer z pile could easily just be more confusing.  If there's going to be a big code change to the app I'd rather see layers added than an attempt to make the pile less annoying.

Not sure layers would add anything to the specific problem.  It can be demonstrated with two objects in the same layer.  If the pasted object would be completely hidden behind another there needs to be some intervention.  Don't think it would be such a big code change.  I have some experience in determining overlaps as my diagrammer detects some and will move things if there would be overlaps.

Paolo

[Glassboy]

Not sure layers would add anything to the specific problem.  It can be demonstrated with two objects in the same layer.  If the pasted object would be completely hidden behind another there needs to be some intervention.  Don't think it would be such a big code change.  I have some experience in determining overlaps as my diagrammer detects some and will move things if there would be overlaps.

You'd be able to turn layers on or off or move the focus between layers.  I'd rather be able to build a good decorator layer than the current situation where you're juggling unlabelled objects in the z-order.  By extension you should be able to create a standard diagram template with decorators already on it.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Not sure layers would add anything to the specific problem.  It can be demonstrated with two objects in the same layer.  If the pasted object would be completely hidden behind another there needs to be some intervention.  Don't think it would be such a big code change.  I have some experience in determining overlaps as my diagrammer detects some and will move things if there would be overlaps.

You'd be able to turn layers on or off or move the focus between layers.  I'd rather be able to build a good decorator layer than the current situation where you're juggling unlabelled objects in the z-order.  By extension you should be able to create a standard diagram template with decorators already on it.

We may be talking at cross purposes here.  In this example, there are over a dozen boundary objects.  Some (relatively thin) overlapping vertically and horizontally and some (larger) enclosing large areas which may include the other boundaries as well as standard objects.  The problem occurs between the various boundaries NOT between the objects and the boundaries.  All the boundaries would, I expect, be in the same layer.

Paolo

[Glassboy]

We may be talking at cross purposes here.  In this example, there are over a dozen boundary objects.  Some (relatively thin) overlapping vertically and horizontally and some (larger) enclosing large areas which may include the other boundaries as well as standard objects.  The problem occurs between the various boundaries NOT between the objects and the boundaries.  All the boundaries would, I expect, be in the same layer.

Yeah sure, I still think the ideal approach is to look at the paradigm used by graphics and CAD tools, not pop up Clippy and say "I see you've hidden this boundary behind three others, would you like to move it to the top of the pile".

Rather than make the EAUI worse let's suggest things that make it better (and more powerful).

[Paolo F Cantoni]

We may be talking at cross purposes here.  In this example, there are over a dozen boundary objects.  Some (relatively thin) overlapping vertically and horizontally and some (larger) enclosing large areas which may include the other boundaries as well as standard objects.  The problem occurs between the various boundaries NOT between the objects and the boundaries.  All the boundaries would, I expect, be in the same layer.

Yeah sure, I still think the ideal approach is to look at the paradigm used by graphics and CAD tools, not pop up Clippy and say "I see you've hidden this boundary behind three others, would you like to move it to the top of the pile".

Rather than make the EAUI worse let's suggest things that make it better (and more powerful).

OK, I think I get it now.
By changing the paradigm you can always past tot he top of the respective layer and things work out much easier for the user to comprehend.

In the interim, pending the paradigm shift, I think Clippy needs to make an appearance.

Paolo