21 Jan
2013
21 Jan
'13
3:33 p.m.
Hi,
Regarding this topic what I would propose is to have an "Administer Page"
section in the menu (just like we have for Wiki and for Space).
It will contain:
* "Look & Feel"
** "Presentation" - giving the opportunity to change the style just for one
page (maybe different layout for apps' WebHomes or different ColorTheme,
etc.)
** "Page Elements" - what this mail was initially about, I will detail later
** "Panel Wizard" - we could leave it just at space level, but could be
interesting also at page lvl
* "User & Groups"
** "Rights" - this will contain what we currently have under "Edit"
->
"Access Rights"
Having the "Administer Page" it would be very easy for someone to
Add/Remove what metadata he wants to see for a certain page. Having that
section customizable is better than hiding them programmatically without
the ability of a reverse (from the UI). Comments and attachments can be
"useless" depending on the type of the page.
Having this mechanism at a page lvl it will be very easy to define the use
cases.
For example, when creating a new app by using the AppWithinMinutes, in the
wizard we could ask the user if he wants his app pages to have "Comments",
"Attachments", "History", "Info", etc. functionality
displayed by default.
He could select if he wants this features to be enabled/disabled for "All
Pages" or just for the "App's WebHome".
Like Sergiu said we could disable these features for technical pages. Right
now in XWiki we don't have the concept of technical page and this is rather
implemented with the Hidden mechanism.
Anyway our hidden/technical pages are in fact application pages. The
example Sergiu described is about the Tags app. Also User Directory,
Scheduler, Share by email, etc. are apps.
Accordingly to the example I gave we could consider SOME default XWiki apps
not to have the "Attachment", "Comments" functionality. Of course we
will
have exceptions and these will be content applications like Blog, User
Profile, etc.
Depending on how we see the wrapping at a user mental model, we could
consider "User Directory" page to be the "Users" app homepage, where
"User
Profile" entries are entries in this app. In this use case the homepage
could have the "Comments", "Attachments" functionality disabled, while
the
rest of the pages have it enabled.
So from a technical point of view we have:
- "Page elements" at a wiki lvl
- "Page elements" at a space lvl (app lvl)
- "Page elements" at a page lvl (app's wehbome) that overrides the former
with some initial values for our default apps and with the ability for the
user to customize what we wants depending on what application he is
building.
Regarding the logic behind hidding/showing the "Comments",
"Attachments"
functionality for our default apps this depends on questions like:
- is this app an internal app or these pages can be seen by users?
- does this app allows attachments?
- the content of this page is static or dynamic? should the user
improve/comment on the content of this page?
- etc.
Thanks,
Caty
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Jan 20, 2013, at 6:54 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On 01/20/2013 11:31 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>
> On Jan 20, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> For content pages, the bottom tabs (comments, attachments, history,
>> information) are very useful features. But does it make sense to keep
>> those active for very technical pages?
>>
>> For example, when viewing details about a tag, (Main/Tags?do=viewTag),
>> why should people be allowed to comment? They might wrongly think that
>> they're commenting on a tag, but that's just one complex page that
>> handles almost everything about tags, so a comment like "this tag has a
>> typo" doesn't help at all.
>>
>> Other pages should have no bottom tabs as well: user directory, blog
>> category management, the whole scheduler space, share by email...
>>
>> While the homepage is a technical page (by default), it does make sense
>> to leave the comments active, since it's the entry point for every user
>> (although I think that the messaging system is a better way to send
>> global messages).
>>
>>
>> IMO, the advantage is that we're hiding actions that are rarely useful,
>> but could be misused. The disadvantage is that we're breaking the
>> universality of the UI.
>>
>> I'm +1 for hiding, fewer mis-usable features is always better.
>
> What if admins want to leave comments on a tech page modified by
another admin
to ask some question for example?
Sending a message to another admin should be done by... sending a
message, not by commenting. A direct message will reach a user faster
than hoping that the target user will stumble upon the page and read the
comment.
If you're saying that comments are useless then we should remove comments…
:)
> Said differently, shouldn't bottom tabs
(comments, attachments, etc) be
visible to admins for example? This could be
achieved by only giving view
rights to non admins by default on tech pages.
Tech pages aren't supposed to be viewed only by admins. They're useful
pages for every user, so they should be visible (view tag cloud, view
documents tagged with a specific tag, view the list of users, browse
blog categories...). And not having view right doesn't mean that the
bottom tabs will be hidden. Just the "add comment", "add attachment"
actions will be unavailable.
ok my bad, I meant edit/comment rights, not view rights.
And even if adding is disabled, but why should
this information be
visible to any user at all? Forbidding edit still means that a user
wanting to see which pages are tagged with "needsreview" will see a "Hey
John, could we have an undo to tag renaming?" comment. What would you
think if you saw that?
Again if your point is that comments are useless then we should remove
comments. I think there's a place for comments but it seems your discussion
is actually asking us to define more precisely what is the use case/need
for comments.
Also I think there's a difference between a Tag Dashboard page which is a
technical page but for end users and a technical page not for end users
(i.e. hidden page). Both will need different solutions I think. So this
proposal should address both needs.
> Another use case: imagine I'm an admin
and I want to modify a tech page
and I'd like to add an attachment to that
page… IMO bottom tabs are still
useful for admins on tech pages.
This isn't about disabling attachments and comments. The bottom tabs are
almost an _invitation_ to do stuff. Without them, it is still possible
to go to the attachments page by clicking on the "Attachments (0)" link
below the title. De-contextualizing these actions will reduce the risk
of associating a comment/attachment with a particular view of the
scripted page.
If the bottom tabs are removed then those links will also need to be
removed obviously since otherwise a user can click on them...
> IMO the issue is different. If a tech is not
supposed to be modified by
the user then users should have only view rights on the
page and NOT edit
rights. This will solve this issue.
It's not just about changing, but also about what's visible on the
screen, and the usefulness of such information vs. the number of WTFs
generated.
I don't see any WTF. For me any page that is a end user visible page can
have comments without any WTF. For example on the tag dashboard page,
someone may comment and say "how do I get the tag dashboard to display
xxx?" or anything else in just the same way it's done on any other page.
In addition I'm actually finding the removal of the bottom tab a huge WTF.
As a user I know what a page is, and if I see those tabs are not present on
some pages, I'll think "what???? WTF? Why is there not tabs there….
Forget about admins, they will still be able to
add comments
and attachments. Think about simple users searching for stuff and seeing
a comment completely unrelated to what they're searching for.
I forgot to say that this has already been done in a few places, and
nobody complained about the missing things:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Tags
http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Search
http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Invitation/
It's not because it's been done that it's an accepted strategy/decision.
I've seen those and I've always been uneasy about them and they've been
done without any strategy whatsoever…
All I'm saying is that we need this discussion because we need to know 1)
if we want to remove bottom tabs 2) and if so, on which pages.
ATM it's not clear for me at all.
Thanks
-Vincent
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs