17 Mar
2010
17 Mar
'10
12:02 p.m.
Hi Vincent,
On 03/17/2010 11:44 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
We can keep it separate using the js and css that is currently in the
extensions, for the moment.
But as a general strategy, if we "integrate" them in the default platform
/
enterprise and it gets stable enough, I don't see why they won't be
properly
integrated, i.e. instead of adding the "Annotations" tab shortcut from js,
put
it in the vms where the others are, same for the Annotations tab, etc.
However, we need to make sure we preserve the level of customizability:
annotations are designed to be easily customizable, from forms and UI, to
js
powering functionality and all, easily *from the browser* with no
filesystem
access. I prefer it stays like that.
The proper way of doing this is with an extension mechanism where wiki JSX
(so in the browser) come and register new features/extensions against the
generic annotation feature (a plugin system of some sort), not by letting
developers modify the core of the annotation feature script (which makes
it un-maintainable)
On Mar 17, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
>> Hi Jerome,
>>
>> On 03/15/2010 09:37 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
>>>> Hi Vincent, all
>>>>
>>>> On 03/15/2010 12:15 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> We've slipped badly for the 2.3M1 release (my fault for not
>>>>> monitoring
>>>>> it closely enough). It was planned on the 8th of March and we're
>>>>> the
>>>>> 15th already (one week delay).
>>>>>
>>>>> The other problem is that we don't have what we had imagined
would
>>>>> go
>>>>> in
>>>>> 2.3M1 (color theme improvement for ex). Right now there are lots of
>>>>> changes but nothing really user-noticeable.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'd suggest the following:
>>>>> * Delay by a few days in order to be able to include:
>>>>> - color theme improvement. Sergiu you need to tell us if that's
>>>>> doable
>>>>> and for when.
>>>>> - captcha on comments. Caleb, let us know if that's all done or
if
>>>>> there's need for more testing/development.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bonus:
>>>>> - Anca, will it be possible to have annotations released for 2.3M1
>>>>> (ie
>>>>> now)? How much more time would you need?
>>>>
>>>> I'll close the vote for XWIKI-4775 asap, and commit it since
it's
>>>> due a
>>>> long
>>>> time now.
>>>> I shouldn't need more than 2 days, but how would we want the
>>>> annotations
>>>> integrated in the platform?
>>>>
>>>> Right now they're built as an extension, with some jars to deploy on
>>>> the
>>>> server
>>>> and a .xar to install the default annotations application.
>>>
>>> Annotations JS and CSS should be moved to web/standard/ as filesystem
>>> extensions/resources (as are the other "core" UI features), not be
>>> contained in the XAR.
>>
>> Actually that's a longer refactor, to actually make the Annotations
>> part
>> of the
>> UI / skin, instead of having this integration done in js, after the
>> pages
>> get
>> rendered. That's if we make it a core default feature.
>
> But isn't that what we are discussing right now, making it a core
> feature?
yes, but I don't think it's fully decided (should send a vote asap).
For me, as soon as we distribute annotations together with XE, their
should be not a single line of JavaScript in wiki documents.
(But that does not mean you need to rewrite everything so that more
comes
with the rendered DOM and less is injected/manipulated in JS - though I
agree it would be nicer if the annotations would work even when there
would be no JavaScript :)
For me it should be packaged in the default XE but it should stay as
separate as possible from the rest, i.e. it should be possible to have a
working platform without the annotations feature. This is true for
almost everything but for technical reason we cannot always do it.
If we can keep it separate and use skin extensions for ex rather the
having to modify existing templates, etc we should probably do that.
However, for the moment (2.3M1), that's quite a bit of refactoring (the
integration) which i'm not willing to do.
So for M1 it would be either:
1/ all in xar (js, css, script documents with annotation forms)
If it's only for M1 as a path to have the feature integrated in templates
and resources, it means you are creating yourself a challenge for the
migration path (you will need to find a way to delete or ignore the
always-loaded SX from the wiki if at some point the make their ways into
the core).
2/ js & css in resources, script documents with
annotation forms & other
scripted UI in .xar
What does form and scripted UI means ? They are scripts that generated
HTML loaded by AJAX in the pages ? (for example in the docExtra tabs ?) Or
is it something else ?
My vote goes for 1/ since it's less mess.
0
Jerome.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Jerome.
>
> Anca
>
>>
>> Jerome.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anca
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs