Hi,
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Oct 28, 2008, at 5:22 PM, Anca Paula Luca wrote:
Anca Paula Luca wrote:
> Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
>> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>> On Oct 28, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Jean-Vincent Drean wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The last proposal for links management in the wysiwyg editor can
>>>> be
>>>> found here :
>>>>
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Design/NewWysiwygEditorInterface/wy…
>>> Sounds nice. Some comments:
>>>
>>> * The link menu items should be improved IMO:
>>> - I would put adding an external link at the bottom since it's not
>>> the most used one
>>> - The labels should be improved. I don't know if "wanted page"
is
>>> obvious (it wasn't for me)
This is not due to the label itself but to the very concept it's covering.
Creating a link towards a page that does not exist yet, thus inviting users
to create it at a later stage is a key wiki concept that has always been
hard to explain to new wiki users. Whatever the name we choose, it will not
be an optimal one. A way to improve this would be to add a little
information button that triggers a tooltip explaining that creating a link
towards a wanted page means creating a link towards a page that does not
exist yet but that other users are encouraged to create.
>>> *
The screenshots are missing wiki selection (for multi wiki
>>> installs)
Wiki selection is planned (it would be a wiki selection page at the
beginning of the wizard) and was not added because it does not change the
logic of screenshots.
>>> *
I'm not sure I like the wizard like approach, i.e. having to
>>> select
>>> some value before selecting others. I think I would have
>>> preferred a
>>> single screen but that's me only.
>> I'm not into the wizard approach also. One reason is indeed the fact
>> that I have to step through 3 dialogs or so in order to insert an
>> internal link. Another reason is that the solution with extended
>> lists
>> is not scalable at all. The Main space on
xwiki.org has more than
>> 100
>> pages (I discovered this after I killed next.dev.curriki by trying
>> to
>> view the space index for XWiki space..) so scrolling through these
>> 100
>> pages is a pain. Why not using filterable combo boxes?
>
> Wizards seem indeed a little too much, at least the way I see
> things, that the
> link should be something quite fast to add.
Yep me too
I was thinking about suggest boxes
> since *the user should know already something about where he wants
> to link*. He
> will very very very rarely need to see *all* pages / spaces to
> choose one (it's
> not like he's picking randomly!)
>
> My extreme approach for this would be a suggest in which the user
> would write
> something like:
> <wikiName>:<SpaceName>.<PageName>
> and he would have suggestions for each of the 3 fields.
I agree that's too cryptic and the several suggest boxes ideas is
better.
Now I am
very aware that this might seem cryptic for a lot of users
so just 3
suggest fields could do it. This can also help with:
* not loading the whole list of spaces / pages, since we could load
suggestions
only after we got some hints from the user (the first letter, for
example)
* allowing the user to insert a page that does not exist in the
same input as an
existing page/space, thus transparently creating a link to a new
page (I'm not
really sure we want that, though)((
Forgot to mention, suggest boxes is almost the same thing as the
filterable
combo boxes, in the end, something that would allow you to type and
see the
matches for what you type, but also show you the whole list if you
really,
really want to see it.
Yes I'm +1 for that (suggest fields + list below as it's done for the
RMUI). Basically as it was proposed by Guillaume initially.
I disagree with this proposal. Even though I am its original writer, I now
think that it is does not suit well the needs of the people we expect to use
our WYSIWYG editor, for a number of reasons.
1. We do not need link insertion to be fast, we need it to be easy to
understand for a wiki newbie. If the user is unable to understand how link
creation works the very first time he's looking at the dialog box, without
reading any kind of manual, he simply won't try doing it ever again. That
would be a definite FAIL.
2. This proposal was written by a geek, with geeks in mind, assuming
fantasy use cases. We spend more than 60% of our uptime in front of a
computer screen and we are used to complex interfaces such as JIRA's or an
IDE's. Therefore we are NOT representative of what 80% of our users will
want to use. The interface I have suggested is too complex for a newcomer
(too many columns, too many options, complex behaviors)
3. It does not matter if creating a link in the WYSIWYG editor takes some
time. How many links do we expect our users to create in a typical day? I do
not think that a typical user will create more than maybe 5 links a day.
Since the beginning of the week, even though I am a heavy wiki user, I may
not have created more than 2 links on our intranet. So if it takes 20
seconds to create one, it does not matter whatsoever.
4. We need to guide our users. People are used to their computers' folder
hierarchy. I'm looking for the Word document that is in my personal files
folders that is in my My Documents folder on my main hard drive. Power users
use search. Most users browse. So providing simple browsing as the main
option for creating links is probably the right thing to do.
5. People who truly care about speed will use the wiki editor anyway. It
will ALWAYS be faster to write {{xhtml}} {{/xhtml}} than to click a button
to trigger a dialog box, then click a macro to select it and so on. Power
Users tend to use the wiki editor once they feel familiar with the wiki
concept.
6. As for the technical issue - mainly scalability of we want to offer a
list of 150 or so pages with a real scroll (not a JS one). I'm sure (ok, I
strongly hope) that here are ways to optimize the underlying storage
mecanism in order for it to have an index of all spaces and an index of all
pages in every space available upon request.
What's more, it is Laurent's job to have an insight into what our customers
and users will expect. The same way I trust you guys for delivering a great
architecture or clean, working and tested code, I trust Laurent for
proposing an interface that actual users will want to use. I am NOT an UI
engineer. Designing great UIs requires skills, experience and patience. It's
all too easy for us to come and give our opinion about mockups. However if
designing great interfaces was that easy our users wouldn't be saying that
XWiki is hard to use :-)
So even though I would personally benefit more from the complex UI I've
proposed, I think the best thing we can do for XWiki right now is to think
about real people who hardly know how to use a wiki and provide them with a
dead-simple, wizard-based interface with very little options that will guide
them through the whole process. Let's accept it: we're not the WYSIWYG
editor's target market. Our mothers are. And my mother would be definitely
unable to use the interface I've suggested :-)
Guillaume
Thanks
-Vincent
> Happy coding,
> Anca Luca
>
>>> * It's missing the ability to specify any number of parameters (for
>>> advanced usages)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Guillaume Lerouge
Product Manager - XWiki
Skype ID : wikibc
http://blog.xwiki.com/