6 Jun
2017
6 Jun
'17
8:45 a.m.
Hi,
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/GlossaryApplication>
> .
>>>> 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]
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:
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
Hi Sarthak,
Can you explain your reasoning because it’s important you understand the
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...
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? 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