It would be very natural when all objects placed inside the bigger one move whenever the bigger moves.
I intentionally used “inside” as it is the most common way we think about computer based graphics.
However in real world if we place A4 sheet on the table, then put a few stickers (and even non-sticky object), and then move the whole paper - everything on top of it would move.
So it would be super cool if this scenario were possible:
- I put the main object on the board
- Then set some switch (like “physical stacking” - On)
- The object might change it’s appearance (like getting some background or material-style shadow)
- I put some objects on top of it
- They might get some appearance (like small dash in the corner, or some kind of shadow)
- Whenever I move the main object - everything moves simultaneously.
- Subsequently - if there is a stickers with stickers on it on top of the main object - whenever I move that sticker - it takes all “nested” stickers and allows it to move around the main object or outside it (might automatically inherit “physical stacking” setting and keep it it outside).
Similar behavior could be implemented for stickers. They are literally stickers - so they should stick to any non-transparent thing, especially to themselves, and move together.
Why grouping doesn’t work?
Grouping is nice feature, but it requires extra actions. And since it is not possible to interact 100% with grouped objects (like draw connector), I have to ungroup and then group again. Natural physical stacking would work much better.
Why framing is not enough?
Frames intended for a different thing - present similar objects as a scene. My whish list idea is about having all objects performing similar to physical objects in real world.
