Bug? Switching off visibility deselects the layer

[MJW]

If a layer is active and the visibility is switched off with the check box, a different layer is activated. This also means toggling the visibility deactivates the layer. Perhaps it's intended to work that way, but I find it very inconvenient. I couldn't figure out why I always seem to be working on a different layer than I intended to be, and this is at least partly why.

 

(I used "select" in the title, but I think "activate" may be the more correct term. I'm not completely sure.)

Edited April 17, 2015 by MJW

[BoltBait]

This behavior was done on purpose to limit the number of support contacts (emails, forum posts, etc.) from beginners saying that they're trying to draw on the canvas and it isn't showing.

More experienced users will know what has happened and simply select the desired layer.

[MJW]

I'll learn to live with it, but I still don't like it. I often toggle a layer to make sure it's the layer I intend to change. It somewhat defeats the purpose if it deactivates the layer. I wish it would restore the activation if a layer was made invisible and then made visible with no other actions in between. As a matter of fact, I would think that if the layer is deactivated when made invisible, then making a layer visible should make it the active layer.

Edited April 17, 2015 by MJW

[Rick Brewster]

Not a bug.

[MJW]

A feature, no doubt. Just one I don't care for.

[MJW]

If this must be done, I think it should select the uppermost visible layer. That seems to me the only choice that has a reasonable chance of achieving the desired goal of allowing beginning users to see the changes they're making. For any layer except the top visible layer, the change may be covered up by a higher layer, hiding the change. I will continue to respectfully believe it would be better to have the active-layer selection be independent of the visibility.

Edited April 19, 2015 by MJW

[Ego Eram Reputo]

Can't agree about the direction of the active layer focus.  I think the present functionality is logical and appropriate.  

 

Hiding a layer transfers the active focus to a lower layer.  Transferring up in the stack doesn't seem logical.  The flow must be to cascade downwards surely?

[MJW]

If it worked that way, it still wouldn't make sense to me, but that's not how it works. Sometimes focus goes up the stack; sometimes it goes down. Perhaps it goes to the nearest visible layer. Wherever it goes, I see no reason to expect it would be to a layer I'd want to be active. The point I was trying to make, though, is that if the objective is to allow users to see the changes they're making, then the only way to achieve that objective is to activate the uppermost visible layer, since otherwise the changes may be obscured by a higher layer.

Edited April 20, 2015 by MJW