Very strange - I don't see that at all
It probably depends on the screen size and such factors, but you can't narrow down the facets column further than that, can you?
but you can't narrow down the facets column further than that, can you?
No - that's about what I get.
Interesting.
It appears to be tied to the size and/or window type. I can get it much narrower if I open as a floating window or if I drag to open as half the screen. If I open as full screen, it has much more wasted space.
There also seems to be a max width that functions in a similar way, depending on the window size/type.
Looking for a workaround, I tried a little experiment. I dragged the library to a half-screen space on the left. The Filter area will go pretty narrow. Making the Filter area as narrow as it will go, I drag the right edge of the Library window to the right to expand it. The Filter area widens proportionally to the Library width. It won't remain at its max narrow width as the Library window is widened, so I think the minimum width is keying as a percentage of total Library window space.
I think the minimum width is keying as a percentage of total Library window space.
Makes sense - and applying a traditional wooden ruler, I think this percentage is coded to be 20%, whereas 10% or even - to accommodate Rosie's monitor - 5% would be sufficient.
I think the minimum width is keying as a percentage of total Library window space. Makes sense - and applying a traditional wooden ruler, I think this percentage is coded to be 20%, whereas 10% or even - to accommodate Rosie's monitor - 5% would be sufficient.
I agree.
Yes, I have an ultra-wide monitor, and I usually have the Library maximized. It's plenty of space to see most of the columns in the library, so the wasted space isn't really a big deal. It's just that I would like my columns to look closer together so that I don't have to move my mouse so far to go back and forth between a facet and the other columns. There's no such limit on how narrow I can make the "Title" field, so why should it be so strict for the facet sidebar?
Should we reconsider how resizing should affect split views? Why should (or shouldn't) the facet view width change?
If the user wants to reproportion the split view, should they have the ability to change it to any width without the program enforcing some minimum split view width?
Might it be reasonable or expected behavior to completely hide the facet by dragging the split view separator all the way to the left?
One can change the code to handle an edge case for ultra-wide monitors, but is that sufficient to delight users with how the desktop's split view behaves?
(It would be ideal if split views could behave and adapt the same across desktop, mobile, and web platforms, but that's probably a big ask.)
I would endorse a system that allowed for the lesser of x pixels or y% of the library pane.
