Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 3:21 pm

Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:39 pm Post


Each of these concepts is used in the early stages of writing.
Lists: a number of connected items or names written or printed
consecutively, typically one below the other
Stacks: a pile of objects, typically one that is neatly arranged
BIN: a receptacle for storing a specified substance
Scapple has lists pseudo-named as stacks which don't work as bins
or stacks. Watch the forum as user after user is confused by the
misuse of the term stacks by Scapple.
During the early stage of writing, lists of random items are
accumulated. This continues until 1) the number becomes to
numerous or 2) until the focus changes to one topic/group.
Scapple needs better feature at that point.

Scapple runs out of horsepower at about tens of items.
Zooming is kinda okay until the font is too small to read
Scrolling is manual labor I don't love.
Lists are lists forever, they never evolve.
While merge helps, it only helps at the conclusion of Scappling,
not during the process.
If lists could be real stacks as normally understood in the world
outside of Scapple, then hundreds of items could again be handled.
If Lists could be bins (hidden/invisible lists), then hundreds,
maybe thousands of items could easily be handled in Scapple.
"ONLY Lists" LIMIT the usefulness of scappling to me and many

IMO, the associating list items with a shape for grouping is a kludge.

Bins and Stacks could be easily implemented without damaging the
perceived perfection of Scapple as it now functions. I'd venture
to say a single menu entry or preference could implement Bins
and/or Stacks.

Conceptually continually hidden lists are bins. Hinted continually hidden lists are stacks.

I urge you to consider the small additional feature which would
exponentially expand the usefulness of the smaller realm of lists
in Scapple. I am and will continue to be an enthusiastic user of
Scapple and Scrivener.