Enhancement request - Meaningful names for Process icons

[avarakin]

Hi,

This is an enhancement request.
Currently PI assigns generic names to the process icons, like Process41, so normally I update the name to something more meaningful.
It would be nice if PI would assign more meaningful names to icons, containing name of the process, like PixelMath1.

Thank you!

[Niall Saunders]

Hi there,

A seemingly perfectly valid request.

However, you might be best to offer a list of the names, or prefixes, that you use or would be most likely to use for each of the Processes that are available.

Certainly, as a start, each Process icon has exactly that - a unique icon that is at least associated with the process, if not actually fully describing the process in 64 x 64 pixels.

So, personally, I find your initially proposed icon name just simply to be far too long. I tend to (try to) use no more than three letters to describe a process when I renaame its icon - and these are usually the first letters of the wrods used in the official name of the process (such as II, STF, SR, HT, DBE, CT, ACDNR, etc. - I leave you to work out which process examples I have used).

Prefixing the naming abbreviation is also a multi-digit number followed by an underscore - such as 07_CC. This would help me remember that this was the seventh process that was applied.

Further, if at stage 7 I believed that I now had an image that I could take forward 'in its own right', I might then save it as 01_07meaningful_name.xisf.

If I apply processes to an image to generate a supporting image (such as a StarMask) then the numeric prefixes, starting again at 01_, would be applied ahead of the 'meaningful name' of an image saved from which a support image will be generated.

If I am creating support images without saving (no specific need to, but perhaps recommended), then the process icons would be renamed, for example 07_a_HT, and it would be the subscript letter that incremeneted.

Of course, you also have to consider how to name a process, that is applied 'through' s support image. such as s Star Mask. Ideally, you would need to name your process icon to reflect all of the above, but to also include the name (or Process Icon  identifier) of the supporting image, and perhaps post-fix the support ID with 'nrm' or 'inv' to indicate to you whether the mask had bben inverted when it was used.

So, really, a heck of a lot of questins need asking first, before any decisions are made - and, most importantly, your requirements may not be thos of fellow PixInsight users (just like my methods may well be met with scorn and ridicule - all deserved - by users who have developed there own conventions).

In fact, I can name (but won't  ) at least one PI user whe has never saved a single process icon in the many years that they have been using PixInsight!

[avarakin]

Yes, I also have a fairly involved naming convention, where in addition to a process name, I also specify which channel it applies to, e.g. DBE_H or DBE_H_1 and DBE_H_2 if I applied it twice. Of course I am not requesting such names to be generated automatically.
Maybe there needs to be some convention, e.g. if a name is longer than 10 then it needs to be abbreviated.
I understand that icons have some meaning but for some reason, they do not tell me much so I always give them some name.

[chris.bailey]

Yes my naming convention for images and Process Icons is very different from Nialls so if his were adopted (its far too logical for me) in an automatic generator I would end up renaming things anyway.

My PI workspace tend to be a mirror of my physical desktop...somewhat haphazard.

[Juan Conejero]

Each process has a unique icon image^[1], which is included in all graphical representations of instances of the process, including process icons. Once you get accustomed to work on PixInsight, these images are the best way to quickly identify processes on the workspace. Besides this, each process icon opens a tool-tip window when you hover it with the pointing device, where the name of its transported process is shown along with the icon identifier.

I have been asked to implement this many times. Of course this could be done, but is not a good idea. It would cause more trouble than benefits. Identifiers of process icons should be informative about the specific tasks they perform, that is, about their actual roles in your processing workflow, not about the names of the processes they transport. This is why process icon identifiers are user-definable. In general, including a process identifier in the identifier of a process icon is redundant because it adds no valuable information besides what the icon is already telling you graphically.

For example, if you create a DynamicBackgroundExtraction icon for an instance of DBE that you have applied to your image, calling it "DBE01" would add no value to your project. Instead, a name such as "remove_light_pollution_gradients", or "fix_bkg_color_casts", would tell you much more about the actual purpose of the applied process, which is much more useful to understand what you are doing and why—now and in the future. For ImageIntegration, a name such as "integration_luminance_newton200" or "LuminanceFrom200BestFramesSelectedWithSFS" would be much more useful than "ImageIntegration03". Or "CropBlackBordersAndRotateToNorth" instead of "DynamicCrop02". Even a brief "final_integration" would be better than "DrizzleIntegration01".

Process icons are named automatically with a generic "ProcessXX" identifier that tells nothing, precisely to 'invite' you (read: 'force' you ) to think on what you are actually doing by looking for really good names for your icons.

EDIT: [1] Some processes and most scripts still don't have a distinctive icon. We are working to fix this.

[drmikevt]

Maybe a change that makes sense is to  literally force you to create a custom name for the process icon.  So, when you create a process icon, what if it didn't automatically call  it 'process43', but instead was a was a blank line  with a cursor already ready for text input.  So you can just drag the triangle and release on the workspace to create the process icon and then be able to immediately start typing to create the name instead of having to select the process, choose 'rename', and then rename. 

It would seem that if the intent in naming it 'process43' is to force us to rename it to something useful, and if the vast majority of PI users rename the icon to something useful- why not just allow that to happen from the get-go?

Mike

[Niall Saunders]

Hi Mike,

The downside of that approach is that it slows down the process when you just need to quickly save one, or more, process icons whilst you work out the most appropriate setting for your particlar workflow.

In any case, PixInsight prefers not to enforce the imaging poilice  unless absolutely necessary 

[georg.viehoever]

...
Process icons are named automatically with a generic "ProcessXX" identifier that tells nothing, precisely to 'invite' you (read: 'force' you ) to think on what you are actually doing by looking for really good names for your icons.
...

To me, this feels like removing all seat belts from cars, so that drivers act more safely. Well....

[Juan Conejero]

A little bit exaggerated comparison IMO. To continue with another car metaphor, it's more like giving you a car with manual drive. There are few automatic drives in PixInsight.