Bug report #12542
Processing: better naming structure for output
|Affected QGIS version:||3.0.0||Regression?:||No|
|Operating System:||Easy fix?:||No|
|Pull Request or Patch supplied:||No||Resolution:||worksforme|
|Crashes QGIS or corrupts data:||No||Copied to github as #:||20684|
Currently, outputs are named in different ways, sometimes generic (e.g. Output), sometimes referring to the command who generated it (e.g. Reprojected), sometimes repeating "raster" or "layer", "points" etc.
This is confusing, and appears unpolished. Better decide a general schema.
I'm available to help applying it, once decided.
#4 Updated by Alexander Bruy almost 6 years ago
AFAIK Processing assigns names to the outputs based on the name of the output parameter or using name of the output file (there is an option in the Processing settings for this).
Of course we can edit all algorithms and change labels for outputs, but IMO this is not optimal solution as some algorithms produce multiple outputs and it may be difficult to find short and meaningful names for them. Maybe some generic approach can be used, for example using combination from algorithm and output name, or output name + file name.
#5 Updated by Paolo Cavallini almost 6 years ago
The problem is IMHO twofold:
- calling a resulting raster in many different and uninformative ways (e.g. Raster, Output, Grid, Layer, etc.) is confusing and does not look nice
- more substantially, it is difficult for the user to select one of the results of previous analyses as an input for further ones, if there is no clue about the origin from the name.
Please have a look to my recent commits, I believe the situation is much more clear now.
I do not think an automatic approach can give very good results; the main disadvantage of my proposal it that it takes some times to fix all the output names in a coherent manner.
#6 Updated by Victor Olaya over 5 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Feedback
Yes, definitely the labels can be changed, and that won't break anything in the execution of algorithms.
As you say, it's a tedious task and requires time, but +1 fro mme if you feel like changing any of them for a better name