13 Aug
2011
13 Aug
'11
6:50 p.m.
On Aug 13, 2011, at 3:00 AM, Jun Han wrote:
Dear Vincent, Sergiu and Eduard,
Before the end of GSOC program, I will focus on rest part, including
coding + polishing+ documentation.
After that, I can take a look at adding xwiki syntax 2.0 support.
Great!
It would be great that some general guidelines can be
given regarding
how to achieve this goal.
There are 2 things to consider:
1) Supporting multiple syntaxes. When editing a page in XEclipse you should be able to
select the page syntax: xwiki syntax 1.0, xwiki syntax 2.0, xwiki syntax 2.1, jspwiki
syntax, confluence syntax, mediawiki syntax, etc. When a page is in a given syntax and
another syntax is selected the content must be converted to the new syntax (as it's
done in XWiki Enterprise in the wiki and wysiwyg editors).
2) Syntax highlighting. Right now XEclipse support syntax highlighting for XWiki Syntax
1.0. We should at first make sure no syntax highlighting is done for other syntaxes and
then add support for highlighting at least XWiki Syntax 2.0 and 2.1 (no need to support
highlighting for other syntaxes right now). Same thing for autocomplete.
Of course point 1) is the most important. The first part of point 2) is also important (to
have syntax highlighting and autocompletion only for XWiki Syntax 1.0).
Note: To understand more this concept of multiple syntaxes you could check
http://rendering.xwiki.org
However, the overall development progress might be
slow, as the fall
semester has already begun in our university, I will be busy with thesis
and course work.
I understand.
Thanks
-Vincent
Best regards
Jun Han
On 8/12/2011 5:22 PM, Eduard Moraru wrote:
> Hi Jun,
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu<sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 08/11/2011 11:12 AM, Jun Han wrote:
>>> Hi, Eduard,
>>>
>>> Except for the "page rename" function, I do not have other pending
>> issues.
>>> At current stage, more of the methods in the adapater class for xmlrpc
>>> backend are left un-implemented. Do I need to make them work as well?
>> IMO, it's not required for completing the GSoC project, but it would be
>> nice if you have some spare time.
>>
> Same opinion as Sergiu. Your main priority is REST + polish&documentation.
>
> Thanks,
> Eduard
>
>
>>> I will clean and polish the code eventually as well as adding more tests
>>> in the remainder of the GSOC.