Locked layers should not be deletable (as easily)

[Gregor Shapiro]

Not REALLY a bug but somewhat unexpected or sometimes undesireable behavior: A layer that is locked and perhaps not visible can be deleted. Furthermore objects can be moved to AND from a locked layer.
I would expect a LOCKED layer to be just that: unchangeable (except for visibility) but perhaps objects could be copied from a locked layer but not pasted into a layer if it is locked.
I guess I want another level of "security" or locked-ness.
I do not think a "fully locked" layer should be deletable without at least a warning.

[su_v (suv-lp)]

> perhaps objects could be copied from a locked layer (…)

Objects in a locked layer are not selectable (aka 'insensitive'), which also prevents them from being copied (using the regular GUI options).

> (…) but not pasted into a layer if it is locked.

Already works like this: Objects cannot be pasted into a locked layer in current inkscape versions.

[su_v (suv-lp)]

> Furthermore objects can be moved to AND from a locked layer.

Duplicate of Bug #181493 “Locked layers not completely locked.”?
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/181493>

[Gregor Shapiro (gregor-shapiro)]

Objects from one layer(if selected when the layer is not locked) can be moved with "Layer > Move Selection to Layer [[Above, Below]]" even if those layers are locked.

[su_v (suv-lp)]

On 18/11/2012 21:39, Gregor Shapiro wrote:
> Objects from one layer(if selected when the layer is not locked) can be
> moved with "Layer > Move Selection to Layer [[Above, Below]]" even if
> those layers are locked.

That's already tracked in mentioned bug #181493:
<quote>
Also, you should not be able to move anything via Shift-Page Down to it.
Locked should mean locked.
</quote>

AFAICT the remaining issue of this report is the request to warn or prompt for a confirmation before deleting a locked layer:
«I do not think a "fully locked" layer should be deletable without at least a warning.»

<opinion>
I don't expect many users to even bother to read the message in such a dialog, and an accidental deletion of a locked layer can be undone with 'Ctrl+Z' in the current session.
</opinion>

[su_v (suv-lp)]

> I guess I want another level of "security" or locked-ness.
> I do not think a "fully locked" layer should be deletable
> without at least a warning.

What about changing the stack order of layers themselves ('Shift+Ctrl+PgUp|PgDn')? Would this be allowed for locked layers, or would users have to confirm such an action for locked layers too?

[Gregor Shapiro (gregor-shapiro)]

Now it's getting sticky!
Should a layer that is locked be skipped when Shift + Page down-ing from a layer higher in the stack? [could be a reasonable action] I dont think that it should halt all layer changing ability...
The order of the layer is not a propeerty of just that layer ... or is it? If a layer with sublayers is locked should the order of the sublayers be locked.
Maybe a lock for layer positioning???
In my opinoin visibility of a layer should NOT be affected by locking and I think that the ability to snap to objects/object handles on a locked layer should be implemented.