Once upon a time, Layer Group was renamed to Layer Set.
I suppose one of the reason was the action “group Layer” and the layer (now named) “Group Layer” cause some confusion with “Layer Groups”.
However, the name “Layer Set” is a bit awkward to me and I can’t explain why But, source-code-wise, the word “set” for it is confusing with the verb. In fact, internally they are referred as “group” XD
I know Blender (since 2.80, I guess) use the word “(object) collection”. Does anybody know how is it called in ToonBoom Harmony or Moho? @Khemardi ? @KonstantinDmitriev ?
Yep, it sounds more logical.
We will have to update the documentation because we still have people following tutorials from last Ice Age giving up when then can’t find what they expect
Yes, this is so necessary and at same time boring…
Yes, so few tutorials out there… and most outdated.
We should fund some people to make short video tutorials and upload them to our YouTube (and/or yet nonexistent PeerTube) channel.
Waiting some more user opinions about my change proposal now
I honestly don’t see a problem with current terminology. A “set”, “preset”, “collection” - all pretty much the same thing, so it seems like a change for a sake of change. I would even argue that “collection” fits the less because it often describe hobby-related activity, you know, a bunch of random things people collect like stamps, coins, etc. While a “set” is a group of things with a more specific purpose.
English is full of stuff like that. If “group” (noun) and “to group” (verb) is not confusing, why “set” and “to set” would be?
Well, the reason is to uniform the word used to it internally and in GUI. In the past, “Layer Encapsulate” was renamed to “Group” (yes, the green folder), so “Layer Group” needed to be renamed and “Layer Set” was chosen.
Now internally, in code, we have this terminology mess like Layer::get_group() referring to what set it belongs to. On the other hand, set is the usual wording for define something in programming like set_name(), set_group().
So, if I want to make it internally (code-wise) concise to GUI terminology, we would have some strange stuff like set_set() XD
For now we have internally stuff like “Dock_LayerGroups”, identified by string “group”, that shows a LayerGroupTree widget (managed by a LayerGroupTreeStore) and a toolbar managed by GroupActionManager to handle the … Layer Sets.
It’s a bit confusing for someone trying to follow the code XD
I don’t really see the problem with set_set, especially if we make the object’s name start with a capital letter like @Majkel suggested (we can apply this to rest of code that uses the word group to identify a set). Anyway, I shared my opinion but if majority of people think that this change will make code more clear, so be it.
But, source-code-wise, the word “set” for it is confusing with the verb. In fact, internally they are referred as “group” XD
