Simple Folders

Permalink
Hey,

Sets is great and all but i really need folders to organize my files (hundreds of images and pdfs

Mnkras
 
frz replied on at Permalink Reply
frz
what do you get being limited to a category structure that a collection structure doesnt give you? I don't buy that quantity = folders. my gmail works just fine. I can have an email in as many sets that make sense...

with custom attributes you could also make different ways to organize the files by type or meaning or whatever meta data makes sense to you..

i'm not understanding what you're asking for with "simple folders" that you can't already do today.
Mnkras replied on at Permalink Reply
Mnkras
Well first off the people i am doing this for (non profit current site is entirely html and half broken) are well.... morons... they barely know windows and the web (currently i have to edit the html made by someone else)
frz replied on at Permalink Reply
frz
easily the strongest motivation i've ever heard to add functionality to the core. ;)

i think it'll be worth your time showing them how sets work, they're a good deal more flexible than folders and get the job done just as well.
Mnkras replied on at Permalink Reply
Mnkras
Thanks... such a simple feature would be nice like an option to use sets or folders you know?

i don't think it would be to hard
frz replied on at Permalink Reply
frz
im not sure i see how that'd be easy. im also still not clear on what you mean by folders...

do you mean:

1) I don't like the way the file manager puts files into folders acroding to its own weird magic on the back-end ala itunes?

2) I don't like the front end, I want to be able to browse folders and then see files?

3) I don't like the front end, i want to see hierarchy and then files..

etc..
Mnkras replied on at Permalink Reply
Mnkras
i mean like setss they are all in 1 big group that can be filtered

i want small groups that cannot be filtered
stoneyard replied on at Permalink Reply
stoneyard
we use sets and they work just great but I would like to have the ability to great a "set hierarchy" so that I could have sets with sub-sets.
motox replied on at Permalink Reply
motox
I think tags would work nicely into the sets / filter and are more flexible then file based folders.
Tony replied on at Permalink Reply
Tony
I agree that tags are the way to go. The next minor release of concrete already has a couple of tweaks to the file tags architecture that should make them easier to work with, but I'd really like to see better tags support in the interface too, like:

1) The ability to apply/remove tags to a groups of files at once (this might require a special interface with a custom all/none/mixed state button for each tag)

2) Search by tag option.

3) a nicer tags interface on a file's properties window, where you can select from existing tags, and (X) delete links next to each tag, similar to flickr's tagging interface (less important than the other two)