Only scroll search results into view as a result of an actual find operation, and not when the user scrolls/zooms/rotates the document (bug 1237076, issue 6746) #10220
+33
−17
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…eration, and not when the user scrolls/zooms/rotates the document (bug 1237076, issue 6746) Currently searching, and particularily highlighting of search results, may interfere with subsequent user-interactions such as scrolling/zooming/rotating which can result in a somewhat jarring UX where the document suddenly "jumps" to a previous position. This is especially annoying in cases where the highlighted search result isn't even visible when a user initiated scrolling/zooming/rotating happens, and there exists a couple of bugs/issues about this behaviour. It seems reasonable, as far as I'm concerned, to treat searching as one operation and any subsequent non-search user interactions with the viewer as separate and thus not scroll the current search result into view *unless* the user is actually doing another search. This also seems consistent with general searching in e.g. Firefox and Adobe Reader: - Compare with "regular" searching of e.g. HTML files in Firefox, where the user scrolling and/or zooming the document will not force a currently highlighted search result to become re-scrolled into view. - Compare also with Adobe Reader, where the user scrolling, zooming, and/or rotating the document will not force the currently highlighted search result to become re-scrolled into view. The question is then why search highlighting was implemented this way in PDF.js to begin with. It might be that this wasn't really intended behaviour, but more a consequence of the asynchronous nature of the API. Considering that most operations, such as fetching the page, rendering it and extracting its text-content are all asynchronous; searching and highlighting of matches thus becomes asynchronous too. However, it should be possible to track when search results have been scrolled into view and highlighted, and thus prevent these wierd "jumps" when the user interacts with the document. *Please note:* Unfortunately this required moving the scrolling of matches back into `PDFFindController`, since I simply couldn't see any other (reasonable) way of implementing the functionality without tracking the `_shouldScroll` property in only *one* spot. However, given that the new `PDFFindController.scrollMatchIntoView` method follows a similar pattern as `BaseViewer.scrollPageIntoView` and `PDFThumbnailViewer.scrollThumbnailIntoView`, this is hopefully deemed OK.
Snuffleupagus
force-pushed
the
find-less-scrolling
branch
from
c49e139 to
fd87f13
Compare
|
/botio-linux preview |
From: Bot.io (Linux m4)ReceivedCommand cmd_preview from @timvandermeij received. Current queue size: 0 Live output at: http://54.67.70.0:8877/ad53e11a75841c8/output.txt |
From: Bot.io (Linux m4)SuccessFull output at http://54.67.70.0:8877/ad53e11a75841c8/output.txt Total script time: 3.35 mins Published |
timvandermeij
approved these changes
Nov 10, 2018
|
This behavior makes much more sense. Thank you! |
|
@timvandermeij As always, thank you for the reviews :-) Also, I must mention that your recent work, refactoring |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently searching, and particularily highlighting of search results, may interfere with subsequent user-interactions such as scrolling/zooming/rotating which can result in a somewhat jarring UX where the document suddenly "jumps" to a previous position.
This is especially annoying in cases where the highlighted search result isn't even visible when a user initiated scrolling/zooming/rotating happens, and there exists a couple of bugs/issues about this behaviour.
It seems reasonable, as far as I'm concerned, to treat searching as one operation and any subsequent non-search user interactions with the viewer as separate and thus not scroll the current search result into view unless the user is actually doing another search.
This also seems consistent with general searching in e.g. Firefox and Adobe Reader:
The question is then why search highlighting was implemented this way in PDF.js to begin with. It might be that this wasn't really intended behaviour, but more a consequence of the asynchronous nature of the API. Considering that most operations, such as fetching the page, rendering it and extracting its text-content are all asynchronous; searching and highlighting of matches thus becomes asynchronous too.
However, it should be possible to track when search results have been scrolled into view and highlighted, and thus prevent these wierd "jumps" when the user interacts with the document.
Please note: Unfortunately this required moving the scrolling of matches back into
PDFFindController, since I simply couldn't see any other (reasonable) way of implementing the functionality without tracking the_shouldScrollproperty in only one spot.However, given that the new
PDFFindController.scrollMatchIntoViewmethod follows a similar pattern asBaseViewer.scrollPageIntoViewandPDFThumbnailViewer.scrollThumbnailIntoView, this is hopefully deemed OK.Fixes bug 1237076
Fixes #6746