Re: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] New Link and Image syntax for XWiki Syntax 2.2

Hi Vincent, On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>

> Hi Denis, > > On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:21 PM, Denis Gervalle <dgl(a)softec.lu> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> > wrote: >> >>> Hi Denis, >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Denis Gervalle <dgl(a)softec.lu> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi devs, >>>> >>>> I have a very bad feeling with proposal 3, since it split the > identifier, >>>> which makes its main part to loose its meaning when taken alone. So

>>>> cannot comunicate the whole information easily on different channels >>> (think >>>> about copy/pasting such reference ?). This is also really verbose, >>> sometime >>>> it looks odd, and I found it to be complex from a user view point. >>>> Moreover, it could not be easily applied in other situation than

>>>> while ressource identification is not limited to links (think about a >>> macro >>>> arguments ?, see MotionComposer macro that imitate image: for an >>> example). >>>> I know it is hard, but I am currently -1 for this proposal. >>>> >>>> If we look at large, what we really need and intend to achieve is to > have >>>> an extensible syntax to identify ressources in XWiki. There is > obviously >>> a >>>> ready made standardized syntax for such purpose: URN. Proposal 1 is >>> really >>>> near that specification (but too verbose for URL), but I agree with >>> Thomas >>>> that users will complains to be forced to use doc: everywhere. This

>>>> precisely why I made proposal 2, which will fully avoid that

>>> for >>>> user of single wikis (a lot of our user since XE was our mostly >>> downloaded >>>> distribution until now). >>>> >>>> So my vote are (sorry Vincent, but your request to have a truly

>>> vote >>>> is far too restrictive for this matter) >>>> +1 to really conform with a URN syntax as much as possible (remove

>>>> useless verbosity for URL). >>>> Proposal 1: +0 >>>> Proposal 2: +1 >>>> Proposal 3: -1 >>> >>> I also prefer URIs but my problem with solution 2 is having to prefix > with >>> "doc:" for links to subwikis. This is pretty common. >> >> >> I do not see why this is so annoying, we type http:// to start URLs, > and I >> do not feel anyone has ever complains. > > Yes but we don't type URLs often at all… We navigate by clicking.

Are we talking about navigating the wiki ? no, we are talking about

hyperlinked documents, and you need to type the http:// as soon as you refer a document outside of your current server. Isn't that comparable to linking document in another wiki ?

> In any case I think the main issue now is that 1) we have already

> a simpler way for users to type references to docs and 2) other wikis

I do not believe 1) is a good argument. First, if users prefer simpler syntax for subwiki's links compare to an extensible URI base syntax, they may simply continue to use syntax 2.1.

Second, are there so much users with that preference, that also use multiple wikis with links between them ?

Finally, we also provide other means to create documents then writing

using the xwiki syntax. We could also think about improving the editor to insert link/image more easily.

So is the limitation of solution 2, imposed by the need for flexibility,

blocker, as you seems to believe ?

Regarding point 2), I have not enough knowledge of other wikis, but it could be interesting to elaborate and see how and which of those other wikis really support easy interwiki links in there syntax, while

at the same time support to different kind of ressources. I may be wrong, but I do not believe there will be numerous competitor with those

>> So, solution 1 is not that bad, and >> solution 2 is only a feature over it, for those who use very basic > feature. >> It compare to the omnibox of chrome that try to be clever and works in > most >> situations, but some still require you to enter the http:// prefix. >> >> >>> I had proposed another solution in the other thread with a different >>> notation for proper URI notations. The idea was to use the shortcut >>> notation when you wanted to use document references for simplicity > reasons >>> and use the proper syntax when you use proper URIs. >>> >>> Maybe that solution wasn't that bad. I'm putting it again here (with a >>> difference using [[[…]]] instead of >>> as I had said since that

>>> work for images): >>> >>> * Shortcut notation for doc refs: [[label>>docref]] >>> * General notations for URIs: [[[label>>type:reference]]] >>> * Shortcut notation for images: [[image:docref]] >>> * General notation for URIs in images: [[[image:type:reference]]] >>> >>> It looks clunky at first but it isn't really since it represents what

>>> want: >>> * shortcut notation for doc URIs >>> * full notation for any URI >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >> >> This again increase complexity (from a user POV) for very little

>> IMO. It look odd and again it cannot be applied anywhere, like in

>> So I see this fourth solution not much better than solution 3. > > You're not very logical here :) You said you wanted URIs and solution 4

> about URIs while solution 3 isn't about URIs so you should prefer

Have I said the contrary ? 4 is better than 3, but not that much IMO

we still have the split issue. 4 solve the problem for your current

but does not lead to a general way of identifying ressources in XWiki.

Having a consistant solution is also important, and a good way to

the user experience.

If you're keen on URIs (as I am, thanks for reminding me that in your

I do not agree, if you're keen on URIs (and I am) Solution 1 is the best one, considering it will only affect a new syntax.

>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Typos below. >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi devs, >>>>>> >>>>>> Following this thread http://markmail.org/thread/vw3derowozijqalrit >>>>> seems clear that we need to introduce a better syntax for links and >>> images >>>>> in XWiki Syntax 2.2 (in order to cope with use cases such as >>>>> http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XRENDERING-290). >>>>>> >>>>>> The need is to be able to plug new reference type handlers without >>>>> breaking backward compatibility in XWiki Syntax 2.2 (since right now >>> with >>>>> XWiki Syntax 2.0 and 2.1 adding a new type reference handler would > break >>>>> backward compatibility). >>>>>> >>>>>> So here are various proposals to that effect for XWiki Syntax 2.2 > (I've >>>>> only kept the interesting proposals from the previous thread).

>>> vote >>>>> for the one you prefer or add new solutions if you have other better >>> ideas. >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposal 1 >>>>>> ========= >>>>>> >>>>>> Force XWiki Syntax 2.2 to *ALWAYS* use the full form when creating

>>>>> link or image, i.e. all links would need to be written: >>>>> [[label>>type:reference]] >>>>>> >>>>>> Examples: >>>>>> * [[label>>doc:space.page]] >>>>>> * [[label>>doc:wiki:space.page]] >>>>>> * [[label>>path:/some/path]] >>>>>> * [[label>>url:http://xwiki.org]] >>>>>> * [[label>>user:evalica]] >>>>>> * [[image:doc:wiki:space.page@image.png]] >>>>>> * [[image:icon:someicon.png]] >>>>>> >>>>>> CONS: >>>>>> * Harder to write links to documents which is the main use case >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposal 2 >>>>>> ========= >>>>>> >>>>>> Same as with XWiki Syntax 2.1 but for links or images to subwikis > force >>>>> the user to use the "doc:" notation >>>>>> >>>>>> Examples: >>>>>> * [[label>>space.page]] or [[label>>doc:space.page]] >>>>>> * [[label>>doc:wiki:space.page]] >>>>>> * [[label>>>path:/some/path]] >>>>> >>>>> Should be [[label>>path:/some/path]] >>>>> >>>>>> * [[label>>http://xwiki.org]] or [[label>>>url:http://xwiki.org]] >>>>> >>>>> Should be [[label>>http://xwiki.org]] or [[label>>url: > http://xwiki.org >>> ]] >>>>> >>>>>> * [[label>>user:evalica]] >>>>>> * [[image:doc:wiki:space.page@image.png]] >>>>>> * [[image:icon:someicon.png]] >>>>>> >>>>>> PRO: >>>>>> * Still easy to reference docs and images in the current wiki >>>>>> * Close to current XWiki Syntax 2.1 >>>>>> >>>>>> CONS: >>>>>> * Harder to write links to documents in subwikis (for workspaces > users >>>>> for example, see example of xwiki.org) >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposal 3 >>>>>> ========= >>>>>> >>>>>> Always define the type as a link or image parameter, i.e. separate >>>>> subwiki notation from type. >>>>>> >>>>>> Examples: >>>>>> * [[label>>space.page]] or [[label>>space.page||type="doc"]] >>>>>> * [[label>>wiki:space.page]] or > [[label>>wiki:space.page||type="doc"]] >>>>>> * [[label>>>/some/path||type="path"]] >>>>> >>>>> Should be [[label>>/some/path||type="path"]] >>>>> >>>>>> * [[label>>http://xwiki.org]] or [[label>>>http://xwiki.org >>>>> ||type="url"]] >>>>> >>>>> Should be [[label>>http://xwiki.org]] or [[label>>http://xwiki.org >>>>> ||type="url"]] >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Vincent >>>>> >>>>>> * [[label>>evalica||type="user"]] >>>>>> * [[image:wiki:space.page@image.png]] or >>>>> [[image:wiki:space.page@image.png||type="doc"]] >>>>>> * [[image:someicon.png||type="icon"]] >>>>>> >>>>>> PRO: >>>>>> * Still easy to reference docs >>>>>> * Clear separation between subwiki and types >>>>>> >>>>>> CONS: >>>>>> * Harder to write typed links >>>>>> * Harder to write references in non xwiki/2.x syntax that would not >>>>> support link parameters >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> -Vincent