17 Aug
2007
17 Aug
'07
10:21 p.m.
Hi Catalin,
On 8/18/07, Catalin Hritcu <catalin.hritcu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Asiri,
I would go with 1, or 3 but done on the client instead of wasting time
writing emails. The xml-rpc interface is not only for XEclipse to use
and it will stay as general and clear as possible.
Hmmmm... That sounds like a good idea.
I think we could go with the third option but still on the client side. And
the amount of work to be done would be really less. I didn't think about
this before, thanks.... (still, i need to check what needs to be changed).
But anyway, I'm waiting for Vincent's confirmation.
Regards,
- Asiri
Catalin
On 8/17/07, Asiri Rathnayake <asiri.rathnayake(a)gmail.com> wrote:
the
Isn't the whole point of having a space name / title is to display it
whenever possible ? I mean, if we use space keys in XEclipse, that means
we're not being user friendly - assuming titles are more expressive than
keys.
> > Now titles on the other hand are what users understand
> > (what we should display to them) and I think we should not allow them
to
Hi Catalin,
On 8/17/07, Catalin Hritcu <catalin.hritcu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Asiri,
>
> On 8/17/07, Asiri Rathnayake <asiri.rathnayake(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Catalin and all,
> >
> > On 8/17/07, Catalin Hritcu < catalin.hritcu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Asiri,
> > >
> > > Why don't you use the space key? It used to be that the title was
> > > always set to this key. If you were setting a title different then
the
> > > key then this title was just
discarded and the key was returned.
That
> > > was not normal.
> > >
> > > Now about space titles being empty, this is a possible situation
in
> > > XWiki (document titles can also be
empty). If you want to treat
this
> > > situation differently why not do
it on the client side ? And if
you
> > > need to use the space key, then
just use the space key and forget
> > > about the title.
> >
> > This is the issue, at the beginning of XEclipse, we thought a key
was
> > something that should be used to refer
to documents within programs
(not
>
displayed to users) - This is the purpose of a key (a unique
identifier). I
> think it is necessary we keep this
terminology since otherwise we'll
violate
> > the whole purpose of a key (please someone correct me if this is not purpose of a key).
Yes, a key does identify a space, but it is not cryptic like the IDs
used in the API (the IDs are numbers in confluence, and opaque strings
in XWiki). You can display a key to an user without problems. So yes,
keys are identifiers, and no keys are not supposed to be hidden from
the user like the PageID, CommentID etc. be
Agreed.
> > So in summary, XEclipse was developed with the assumptions,
> >
> > 1. Keys should be used whenever we refer to documents within
programs
> empty - but in case if a title is not
available, we can use the key
(since
there is
no other option).
Yes, titles (or space names) can be more expressive. In particular
they can contain spaces, be longer etc. In XWiki they are displayed in
a special field on top of the edit box (which btw is empty by
default).
Most important these two properties of a space can be changed
independently, and the value of one should not influence the value of
the other. This is what the current implementation does. (like
Ok, didn't know about this. The word "key" always brings a cryptic
identifier to my mind....
I too thought of them separately and expected them to be different.
Anyway,
> when invoking XMLRPCs).
>
> 2. Keys should be mapped into titles (or names) when a document is
presented
to a
user.
I think you make a major confusion between space keys and IDs. They
are not the same, see above. Your statements here are true only for
IDs not for space keys. > We can change XEclipse to use keys only and
forget about titles, but
that
> will take some more time. And most
importantly, this might affect
XEclipse
on XWiki
1.1.
Not true. On XWiki 1.1 the title/name was always equal to the key, so
whenever you thought you were using the title/name you were actually
using the key. Now you would use the key explicitly.
Anyway, in my personal opinion, i think it's
necessary we keep the
distinction between keys and titles intact.
This is exactly what i did. They used to be the same, now there is a
clear distinction between the two. with the current scheme, we cannot use space
names / titles alone on
XEclipse since some names can be empty (as you said). So now there are
three
possibilities,
1. Use space keys only in client (for everything) - Then what is the
use
of space names / titles ? <-- have to answer
if we are to go with this
option. And this requires XEclipse to be changed.
2. Enforce spaces to have a title ( a.k.a not ""). <-- Ideal scenario.
3. Use titles / names whenever they are available and switch to space
keys
otherwise - this should be done on server (see my
patch). <-- This is
possible since space keys and titles / names can be changed
independently.
The only disadvantage of this scheme is that
sometimes users get to see
a
title / name of a space which is not the actual
title (when actual title
is
"").
I would go with the third option.
What would you think ?
Regards,
- Asiri
> Regards,
> Catalin
>
> > > On 8/17/07, Asiri Rathnayake <asiri.rathnayake(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry about the late response. Busy with academic work :(
> > > >
> > > > The patch attached will fix the XMLRPC issue related to
XEclipse.
Please
makes
> > > verify it and let me know what you
think.
> > > I tested XEclipse with this patch and everything is normal now.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > - Asiri
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/16/07, Catalin Hritcu <catalin.hritcu(a)gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I updated the xml-rpc implementation on trunk. There are big
changes
> > > > so be careful when updating
since some of the changes are
> > > > incompatible.
> > > > - all non-string primitive types (like date and int) are now
encoded
> > to
> > > > strings
> > > > > the easiest to adapt to this is to start using swizzle which
the
> > > > > translation automatic
> > > > > - the way all identifiers are built has changed
> > > > > anyway, ids should be treated as opaque handlers, so if you
ever
find
important
> > > > yourself parsing them then
you are doing something wrong.
> > > > - the way the page history is different now
> > > > only old versions of the page are considered, and they can be
accessed
> > > > > like regular pages
> > > > >
> > > > > There are other smaller fixes, but these are the most ones.
> >
>
> > > Regards,
> > > Catalin
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>