On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Guillaume Lerouge <guillaume(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
Hi Devs,
another observation regarding this. Earlier today I watched a new user who
was trying XWiki 7.3. He had created a number of pages as terminal pages.
Did he use the default Admin profile (which is configured as advanced) or
did he register a new profile (which is not advanced unless you configure
it explicitly)? The default Admin profile is not the best way to test XWiki
if you are a simple user.
Then he tried to move some pages from their existing
location to another
location, using the tree.
You mean using the Rename Page action, selecting the new location using the
tree? As in
Unfortunately, several times, when trying to drop the page under an
existing page, a "cancel" icon was displayed when he tried to click on the
"Select" button. Of course the reason was that he was trying to drop his
page under a terminal page, but there was no explanation about this in the
UI. It also took me a while to figure things out :-)
The tree from the Rename Page UI doesn't show terminal pages and doesn't
support drag&drop. The "Select" button from the "Select Page"
modal popup
that displays the tree is disabled when there is no page selected in the
tree. So I don't understand what you are talking about.
Thanks,
Marius
All in all that was a very frustrating experience to watch. To me, that's
another reason why I think we should really look at how we could deprecate
terminal pages. I see them being the source of many misunderstandings and
additional issues like this one.
Thanks,
Guillaume
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Caleb James DeLisle <cjd(a)cjdns.fr> wrote:
I can't imagine how I would attempt to
explain a terminal (but not
meaning
it's going to die soon)
page to someone who doesn't know the insides of the sausage factory.
Every page is like a file, and it's also like a folder because it can
have
pages inside of it,
except for the ones that can't...
So +1 that users should never see/create/edit these weird pages which
cannot have children.
Thanks,
Caleb
On 27/11/15 17:10, vincent(a)massol.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On 27 Nov 2015 at 17:06:17, Guillaume Lerouge (guillaume(a)xwiki.com
> (mailto:guillaume@xwiki.com)) wrote:
>
> Hi Vincent,
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:53 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 Nov 2015 at 16:42:39, Guillaume Lerouge (guillaume(a)xwiki.com
>>> (mailto:
>>> guillaume(a)xwiki.com)) wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Hi Marius,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea <
>>>>>> mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Guillaume Lerouge
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> after trying XE 7.4 snapshot some more, I kept asking
myself what
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> was the
>>>>>
>>>>>> point of even allowing terminal pages to exists. I couldn't
see a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> good
>>>>>
>>>>>> reason why any given page would *need* to be terminal, whereas
it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> poses
>>>>>
>>>>>> some issues:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - There is no visual distinction between terminal pages
and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> nested
>>>
>>>> pages
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in the interface (besides "WebHome" in the URL,
which would be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cleaner
>>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> remove)
>>>>>>>> - We're planning to make it possible to reference a
nested page
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in
>>>
>>>> wiki
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> syntax without having to write "WebHome" in it
>>>>>>>> - When creating a new page from a terminal page,
you're creating
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a
>>>
>>>> sibling instead of a child page, which breaks the user
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> expectation
>>>
>>>> (and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> breadcrumb)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - For AWM applications, data/content pages are created as
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> terminal
>>>
>>>> pages, which makes it impossible to add further content
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> underneath
>>>
>>>> them
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the future (say, sub-tasks that would go as child pages
of tasks)
>>>>>>>> - To my knowledge, there is no easy way to transform a
terminal
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> page
>>>
>>>> into a nested page should the need arise later on
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
http://lists.xwiki.org/pipermail/users/2015-November/031558.html
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks. I understand it's fine to have terminal pages, but
are they
>>>>>>
>>>>> really
>>>>>
>>>>>> *needed*?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My feeling is that keeping this concept generates complexity for
no
>>>>>>
>>>>> obvious
>>>>>
>>>>>> benefit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What really generates complexity ATM is the difference between the
UI
>>>>> (Nested Pages) and the Model
(Nested Spaces). I’d like to start a
>>>>>
>>>> design to
>>>
>>>> explore what options we have to remove the concept of Spaces in the
>>>>>
>>>> model
>>>
>>>> and only have pages. I have the feeling it’s going to be tough to not
>>>>>
>>>> break
>>>
>>>> everything but need to explore it to know our options.
>>>>>
>>>>> I feel that terminal pages are already well hidden in the UI so I’m
>>>>> not
>>>>> sure why you think we should remove it completely from the UI. Why
do
>>>>>
>>>> you
>>>
>>>> fear that it’s too advanced for advanced users?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> 2 reasons:
>>>>
>>>> *1/ Practical reason:* as a simple user, if I go to a terminal page
and
>>>> create a page from there, I will
create a sibling to the current page
>>>> instead of a child to the current page. I will not know why it
happened
>>>> like this, nor will I have the
ability to change it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right now users can already create sibling pages when they click the
Add
>>> button on a page.
>>>
>>> It would be easy to add a small warning when you’re on a terminal page
>>> and
>>> you click Add to mention that this is a terminal page that cannot have
>>> children.
>>>
>>>
>> Right, a warning to simple users that something different than what
they
>> expect is going to happen for a reason
that they cannot fathom to begin
>> with since they don't even know about terminal pages in the first
place.
>> It's a bit like telling them:
>>
>> *- XWiki: You can't create a child page from here!*
>> *- User: But, why?*
>> *- XWiki: Because!*
>> *- User: uh...*
>>
>> It only compounds the problem.
>>
>> *2/ Philosophical reason:* why keep something useless if we could as
well
>>>
>>>> remove it? That would be an application of Ockham's razor principle
if
>>>>
>>> you
>>>
>>>> will.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It’s not useless. As I mentioned this is still in the model and we
still
>>> support it. This means that we need a
way for advanced users to be
able
>>> to
>>> create those pages (and using a script to do so is worse than having a
>>> nice
>>> UI for it).
>>>
>>>
>> I have the feeling we're running in circles here. Just because terminal
>> pages still exist in the model doesn't tell me *why* they're still
needed
>> for the future.
>>
>> Do you have specific use cases in mind where it's *better* for an user
>> (or
>> a script!) to create a terminal page rather than a nested page? Does it
>> lead to performance improvements of some sort? Does it prevent
backwards
>> compatibility issues that would be caused
by switching all pages to
>> nested
>> pages? Any other *benefits* from having terminal pages?
>>
>
> I could list use cases (like some cases where it doesn’t make sense to
> have nested pages - like WebPreferences for example - Actually check a
> filesystem, you can’t create a subfile inside a file after all, I think
> users understand that) but anyway it doesn’t matter. The simple fact
that
> we have terminal pages in lots of extensions
require that the user be
able
to create
terminal pages.
Imagine that someone deletes a terminal page by error and you need to
recreate it. You need a way to do that or your extension is not going to
work.
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks,
Guillaume
Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> Thanks,
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>> Guillaume
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - However, I don't see any problem from a page being a nested
>>>>>>
>>>>> page
>
>> instead of being a terminal page
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In summary: why bother with terminal pages at all? I understand
>>>>>>
>>>>> they're
>>>
>>>> an
>>>>>
>>>>>> artefact from our pre-nested-spaces model, but do they really
>>>>>>
>>>>> make
>
>> sense
>>>
>>>> now? We could let existing terminal pages live on, but not
>>>>>>
>>>>> remove the
>
>> ability to create new ones even for admins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am I missing something obvious?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guillaume
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
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