On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:34 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On 18 Sep 2015 at 11:27:33, Marius Dumitru Florea
(mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com(mailto:mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com)) wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:10 PM,
vincent(a)massol.net wrote:
On 17 Sep 2015 at 13:32:28, Eduard Moraru
(enygma2002@gmail.com(mailto:enygma2002@gmail.com)) wrote:
With the introduction of Nested Spaces / Nested
Documents, we find
ourselves having to expand our terminology to accommodate the tree-like
structure of spaces/documents that we are managing.
IMO, we have started going in the wrong direction with using standard tree
terminology directly in XWiki's UI, introducing new terms that simple users
could be easily confused by or overwhelmed (this adding to the already
existing ones).
The specific issue I have in mind is how do we refer child entities for
each concept (wiki, space, page) and how does this scale when the hierarchy
increases.
What I propose is that we Keep It SSimple (*™*) :) and just use the "sub"
prefix for the concept at hand.
Examples:
* wiki -> subwiki (here we can continue using "wiki", as discussed
previously [1], since we don`t actually support nested wikis yet, but if
"subwiki" is used in a conversation it still makes perfect sense)
* space -> subspace [2]
* page -> subpage [3]
The problem with the term "child", as pointed out by Marius in an offline
chat, has indeed the issue that it can only be applied correctly for first
level descendants, after which it becomes inaccurate, since starting with
the second level the term "descendant" is more appropriate.
I’m not sure about this. I think Children could
be used generically to mean any level of Children but would need to be checked.
If you have A.B.C:
* the "Children" viewer (live table) will show "B, C" for A
I think right now it also shows A but this could be fixed.
* the "Siblings" viewer (live table)
will show only "B" (or nothing?) for B
There’s no sibling for C in your definition.
Yes, I know what siblings are :) but I said "for B" not "for C".
If you had:
A.B.C
A.B.D
A.E
Then the sibling for A.B.C would be A.B.D. Thus if you’re on A.B.C and ask for Sibling
you’ll see D in the LT.
If you’re on A.B and ask for siblings you’ll see only
E (and not E, C, D since C and D are not siblings of A.B).
So you don't think that the statement
"E and C are both children of A but they are not siblings because they
don't have he same parent"
is confusing?
Thanks
-Vincent
So B and C are both children of A but are not
siblings. That can be
confusing. You need the tree view to see the actual hierarchy.
Thanks,
Marius
All of this becomes unnecessarily complicated and, IMO, we should avoid
dealing with it by using the "sub" prefix which is much easier to grasp and
accept.
On a similar note, I also find the term "nested" to be a bit unnecessarily
complicated, specially for non-technical and non-english native users.
WDYT?
I don’t like the “Sub" terminology because it’s incomplete. It’s not complete
because you still need words for Parents, Siblings, Root, etc.
I'd much prefer to use a standard Tree terminology:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure)#Terminologies_used_in_T…
BTW Terminal Page could be replaced by Leaf Page if we wanted too but maybe that’s too
technical?
I’d be ok to replace subwiki by Child Wiki/Children Wikis to be consistent.
So overall I find Child/Children, Parent, and Siblings very easy to understand by any
simple user. I find that using Sub, Parent, Siblings is not better (and it would certainly
not replace Sibling).
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs