Reduce page limit for inline set and collection

[C.c]

WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND

We currently have 10 items minimum for viewing inline set and collection.

It would be great if we can have less items displayed because one usage of inline is to layout several things together and view them.

HOW COULD IT BE DONE

• Give more options to users
• Allow users to determine the limit using a prompt for users to enter the limit number

REAL WORLD USE CASES

• Dashboard: users can quickly create everything from the grid view, regardless of their set/collection location and accessing all relations. ← with new object creation in mind, only 1-2 items are needed.
• Comparison between set/collection: targeting the required items and still be able to work within the same window ← Maybe 3-5 items.

RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVES

/

ADDITIONAL CONTEXT

I would hope with the current proposal of making sets into saved search, the ability to display a limit of items will retain.

Merge collections and sets

Hi there, great discussion. Our current vision (subject to change): Search will be more powerful and basically will incorporate all abilities of current sets (filter/sorts/etc.) Sets will be basically saved search requests, maybe we even will rename them Collections will be primary way to work with many objects in more “traditional” data base way with a sprinkle of Anytype flat structure

P.S. Who use 100 items per page for inline set/collection? What’s your workflow?

[Astro-L]

Adding a vote for this. AT has been great for my purpose of breaking tasks down and establishing dependency chains, but all the resulting subtasks can be overwhelming to take in, visually and cognitively. I’ve used Queries to narrow and sort my subtasks by properties like actionability, urgency, and importance, but even a well-ordered list can be a bit much to digest when I’m feeling stressed and scattered. Grid view is helpful for shortening the list to the top 10, but I suspect it would be much more helpful for me to see only the top 3, maybe 5 at most. (I picked those numbers because they felt right, but then I noticed the OP also suggested “maybe 3-5 items.”)

While I think the best option would be allowing the user to specify any custom number, if for some reason only pre-set numbers are possible, then I would like at the very least 3 and 5. But more options than that would certainly be welcome, especially under 10.

@C.c

Who use 100 items per page for inline set/collection? What’s your workflow?

Apparently @pomp does!

Higher Gallery page limit

WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND? Higher Gallery view page limit. HOW COULD IT BE DONE? Add the option to set Page Limit of gallery layout settings to 500 and 1000. REAL WORLD USE CASES Due to (presumably) performance reason, page size of Gallery views can only be set to 60, 84, and 120. However, it’s bad for UX if a user has to constantly move between pages when their computer could support much more items. My computer, for example which is equipped with AMD 7900X was able support more than 10k elements…

I’m linking that here because it’s essentially the same request, just in the opposite direction. Both would be met if a custom number option were added.

[C.c]

Glad this feature would help your workflow and yes custom number would be a more preferred method.

Right, custom limit would solve the issues of both topic, but there is a slight difference in the implementation. I believe Higher Gallery page limit is addressing the page limit for gallery in a full set/query/collection, instead of inline query/collection. Whenever performance permits, higher number of items in gallery supports better overview.

It would be great if we have custom limit for both set/collection and inline set/collection.

Cheers.

[kaye]

Thanks for the suggestion. The easier solution is to add 3 and 5 to the list. On the upper end, it’s certainly performance issues with showing too many objects at once.