On 6 Jun 2017, at 16:10, Sarthak Gupta
<sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Vincent,
My github user-name is sarthak-sopho
https://github.com/sarthak-sopho Thanks
Sarthak Gupta
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi Sarthak,
>
>> On 6 Jun 2017, at 15:59, Sarthak Gupta <sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Vincent,
>>
>> Created the first issue on Jira:
https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/
> GLOSSARY-1
>> How will I access the repo on xwiki-contrib? Whether some request is
>> required on my part?
>
> I’ll need your github user name to add you to the right group so that you
> have the permission.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sarthak Gupta
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Sarthak Gupta <sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Vincent,
>>>
>>> This is crystal clear to me.
>>> Yes, I am totally ok with it. :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sarthak Gupta
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>> On 6 Jun 2017, at 08:26, Sarthak Gupta
<sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Vincent,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Sarthak,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 29 May 2017, at 19:02, Sarthak Gupta
<sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Vincent,
>>>>>>> As the coding period begins tomorrow officially, so I will
need a
>>>> repo in
>>>>>>> xwiki-contrib. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Done:
>>>>>> - Github:
https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/application-glossary
>>>>>> - JIRA:
https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/GLOSSARY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should create a single issue for the 1st version of the
glossary
>>>> app
>>>>>> and describe in the jira what this first version will contain
&
> assign
>>>> it
>>>>>> to you. Then when you commit make sure to use the format as
described
>>>> on
>>>>>>
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPra
>>>>>> ctices#HJIRABestPractices
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, will my general workflow be like:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - making changes inside XWiki(xwiki instance).
>>>>>>> - Exporting those changes. (XML files will be generated)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Make sure to use “mvn xar:format” too. See “xwiki xar plugin” in
>>>> google.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Adding those files to GitHub Repo.
>>>>>>> - Doing regular commits to Github repo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds good!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Secondly, I had a doubt that, if I want to customize a page
using
>>>>>>> CSS/Javascript. What is the correct way of doing that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I mean, whether I create objects(jsx/jsfx and ssx) on the
same page
> as
>>>>>>> Glossary app home page(if I want to add styles to Glossary
home
> page)
>>>> or
>>>>>>> make separate pages for them. I saw the blog app and there it
is
>>>> created
>>>>>>> separately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What’s important is that technical content is created in the
Code
>>>> subspace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, I wanted to enquire if there is some naming convention
while
>>>>>> creating
>>>>>>> different pages, or I should name them suitably.(Yes, those
names
> can
>>>> be
>>>>>>> changed later :P).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are some best practices here:
>>>>>>
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDev
>>>>>> elopmentBestPractices
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Have a “Add Glossary Entry” button and text field to add a
new
>>>> entry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMO, "Add Glossary Entry" button will vanish the
'context' thing
>>>>>>> because glossary will for the items/words on different pages
of
> XWiki.
>>>>>> How
>>>>>>> can a user enter a glossary entry if he doesn't know the
source? :)
>>>> (Just
>>>>>>> like annotations).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This question is worrying me because it probably means we have a
>>>>>> completely different idea of the glossary application!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For me glossary means linking a glossary term with a glossary
>>>> definition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As you can see there’s no context need for doing that obviously…
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you say there *must* be a context like annotation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is actually even wrong IMO because a *ANY* page having the
>>>> glossary
>>>>>> item should render it with a link to the glossary definition...
>>>>>>
>>>>> Can you explain your reasoning because it’s important you understand
> the
>>>>>> work to be done.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was in the thought that a glossary item may have different
meanings
>>>> in
>>>>> different contexts. For eg: In some page a term(say 'foo')
may mean
> one
>>>>> thing and in an another page the term may mean something else.
>>>>> So, I thought that if a user is adding things in context then it
will
>>>> not
>>>>> create that scenario.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, now I think that this idea will not be feasible and will not be
>>>>> user-friendly also. And I was using the term 'annotation' in
a wrong
>>>> sense
>>>>> (sorry for that).
>>>>>
>>>>> The solution to the above problem can be that we should allow user
to
>>>>> create multiple glossary entries for a single glossary item just
like
>>>> in a
>>>>> dictionary. And also it will be a very rare case that there will be
>>>>> glossary item with multiple meanings, so we can also drop this idea.
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> I think this is not a real problem. A glossary is not like a dictionary
>>>> IMO. People are going to use a glossary to define the meaning of some
> very
>>>> specific words/acronyms/etc that are related to their domains/business
>>>> (e.g. “open source”, “wiki”, etc) and I don’t think there’s the issue
> of
>>>> having various definitions. Now that said, having several definitions
> would
>>>> be fine provided we don’t link a specific definition to a page. IMO we
>>>> should keep it simple and keep glossary items independent of the page
> for
>>>> simplicity. So IMO a single text area is enough for the moment.
>>>>
>>>> Ok with you?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me say it differently: A glossary item is not linking a
>>>> description to
>>>>>> one or several words located in a page! It’s linking a
description to
>>>> some
>>>>>> words. Period. Then *any* page having those words should link to
the
>>>>>> description.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> This is good.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you agree?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, this is absolutely clear to me and I totally agree. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I think, it shouldn't be there. WDYT?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Little Guidance required.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sarthak
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Sarthak Gupta
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net
>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Sarthak,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 26 May 2017, at 16:36, Sarthak Gupta <
> sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>> I would be working on the proposal 'Glossary
Application' in the
>>>> coming
>>>>>>>>> days. The details of the proposal can be found on the
Design Page
>>>>>>>>>
<http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/GlossaryApp
>>>> lication>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>> Please tell me if something is not clear. Any
suggestions are
>>>> welcomed.
>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry for responding late, I was on holidays a good part
of last
>>>> week :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wanted to propose a UI for both the pages
('HomePage' and
>>>> 'glossary
>>>>>>>> page
>>>>>>>>> for each item').
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - For the Glossary HomePage:
>>>>>>>>> - A search bar will be employed on the top of page,
which would
>>>> search
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> glossary page(from glossary space) if a user enters
the matching
>>>>>>>>> words for
>>>>>>>>> that glossary items. A search bar will be made using
HTML/CSS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IMO you should check the way it’s done by the FAQ
application.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - The search results (suggestions) will be displayed
on the same
>>>>>>>> page
>>>>>>>>> below the search bar along with the location of the
glossary
>>>>>>>>> item.(considering the fact that two glossary items
with the same
>>>>>>>> name may
>>>>>>>>> exist). I saw that there is a 'Suggest
Widget' for this. Hope I
>>>>>>>>> can make it
>>>>>>>>> work :P .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don’t think that’s the best. Check the FAQ app and how
it does
> it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What would make more sense to me if a UI similar to the
FAQ one:
>>>>>>>> * Display all glossary entries in a LT
>>>>>>>> * Have a search form to search for entries
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Have a “Add Glossary Entry” button and text field to
add a new
>>>> entry
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See
http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/FAQ%20A
>>>>>> pplication
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - On clicking those links, the user will be directed
to the
>>>>>> matching
>>>>>>>>> glossary page.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is this UI ok?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See above
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Glossary Page of each glossary item:
>>>>>>>>> - It will contain two fields.
>>>>>>>>> - First field will be a 'String' which will
contain the name of
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> glossary item.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don’t think that’s needed since the page name can be
used as the
>>>>>>>> glossary item name.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Second field will be a 'text area' named
"Glossary". It will
>>>>>>>>> contain the glossary of that item that a user will
enter itself
>>>> on
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> page, he is on.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is this UI ok?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, the need is exactly the same as for the FAQ app
so it’ll
> be
>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>> simple to copy. At least initially since we may need to
add other
>>>>>>>> properties for glossary items.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The bug difference will come for the rendering side and
the UI to
>>>>>> navigate
>>>>>>>> or add a glossary item when viewing an existing page.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After this I will update my design page and tell you
about my next
>>>>>>>>> steps.....!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sarthak Gupta
>>>>>>>>> [sarthakg]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>