Since it's been a long time since this mail has been started and I want to have progress I will commit the current content + Layout 1 (according to the votes). We can make changes in the future and improve. Thanks for your "votes", Caty [1] http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13478 On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < [email protected]> wrote:
After confirming with Marius, I've updated:
Votes so far: 1. 4 = +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb), +1 (Marius), +1 (Vincent), +0 (Caty) 2. 2 = +1 (GD), +1 (Caty)
Thanks, Caty
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Caty,
I don’t understand why you count Marius for 2 when he said:
"In that case I'm OK with version (1).”
Thanks -Vincent
On 13 Jun 2016, at 13:17, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
Votes so far: 1. 3 = +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb), +0 (Marius), +1 (Vincent), +0 (Caty) 2. 3 = +1 (GD), +1 (Marius), +1 (Caty)
Thanks, Caty
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < [email protected]
wrote:
Vincent, my understanding was that you had a certain preference, but it's true that you didn't explicitly voted. In this case I will try to count just the explicit (+/- 0,1) votes.
Still (after going on the mails) I will consider formulations like "vote", "preferred", "favor", "OK" - although I might be wrong, since otherwise is hard to translate the feedback received in votes. Would be ideal if people would vote explicitly.
So, votes so far: 1. +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb), +0 (Marius), +1 (Vincent), +0 (Caty) 2. +1 (GD), +1 (Marius), +1 (Caty) 3. +1 (GL), -1 (Caty)
Hope I didn't do mistakes, otherwise state them and we will correct the vote.
Thanks, Caty
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
On 08 Jun 2016, at 13:50, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < [email protected]> wrote:
Votes so far on layout: 1. +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb) 2. +1 (GD), +1 (Marius), +1 (Vincent)
That’s not correct. I haven’t voted yet and I never said that the tree shouldn’t be there.
I just highlighted pros and cons of each :)
+1 to 1 because: - This is the option that shows clearly the concept of page hierarchy to users - Admins can then choose to keep it, only keep the AppBar (workgroup flavor-style) or only keep the Tree (documentation flavor-style) - This is about the default flavor which is generic. When we introduce more flavors in the future, those flavors can favor a different panel organization depending what’s best for them
Thanks -Vincent
3. +1 (GL)
After more discussions the vote swifted towards: 1. +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb), +0 (Marius), +0 (Vincent) 2. +1 (GD), +1 (Marius), +1 (Vincent) 3. +1 (GL)
My preference goes to 2.
I vote for 2 since I believe that the Tree is already in the Breadcrumb, and the breadcrumb is introduced by the Tour. I vote for 2 since we have scalability issues that I believe they will pose some problems on the long run for the users.
The only advantage var 1 has is that it displays the tree from the start to the user. But after a time the user will be 'forced' to configure its wiki and remove it. Each time the user will install a new app, both the Appbar and the Tree will increase in size.
I like much more the classic AppBar navigation pattern and I think XWiki's greater strength is in applications.
We are lacking now multiple flavors that could showcase both the KB and Groupware cases, but if I were to choose a default, that would be Groupware.
So on V1 I will be +0, but definitely -1 on V3.
Votes so far: 1. +1 (Ludovic), +1 (Caleb), +0 (Marius), +0 (Vincent), +0 (Caty) 2. +1 (GD), +1 (Marius), +1 (Vincent), +1 (Caty) 3. +1 (GL), -1 (Caty)
Thanks, Caty
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Caleb James DeLisle <[email protected]> wrote:
> I disagree with this point, as a user of web interfaces I don't care if > they look completely busted as long as I can make use of them, even if they > become unusable in 5% of the situations, that's 95% where I can use them. > > Granted if we ship something that looks broken it's an embarassement but > if we ship something that a person cannot navigate then we don't even have > them complaining at us, they just become another silent non-adopter. > > > On 08/06/16 11:01, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: > >> So I think version (1) looks good but it doesn't scale with what we have >> right now. Thus I'm more in favour of solution (2), at least until we can >> resize the panel width.
devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs