[snip]
Ideally yes, i've been thinking about this in the past days, and I still think it's too much. 1/ because it would mean maintaining an annotations js API, which sounds a bit too much: we need to commit to it, make it backwards compatible, etc. However if it's part of the platform, then it follows all platform rules, among which js API. "plugin system of some sort" it's a bit too much... 2/ because chances are it won't be enough unless very granulated, and the finer the granulation, the bigger pain 1/ is 3/ because customizations are not only at .js level, they would be at the macros & scripts generating the UI level too (documents now but templates in the integration), for which building APIs is a bit harder (there is no way to override a macro in velo iirc) and, again, "plugin system of some sort" sounds a bit too much and chances are it won't be enough.
Actually .js can be handled, to some extent, using events.
Yes, that's what I had in mind.
And we can consider that we ignore 'the html issue' since it can all be modified from js provided that appropriate handlers can be registered.
What is the 'HTML issue' ? I don't understand what you mean by that. Jerome.
I don't like the second part that much though.
Thanks, Anca
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).
That's a good point. Is it an option to have good release notes from M1 to M2 and RCs and having it done nice for final?
can the migration be handled with good release notes between milestones and RCs? (as in I agree this would be a mess for a final, but milestones have a different status...)
Thanks, Anca
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 ?
yes, that's what it means: the docExtra tab, all the annotation forms (create, edit, display, etc) are html fetched with ajax from generating scripts in xwiki docs ftm, none is created from javascript, for customizability purposes.
My vote goes for 1/ since it's less mess.
0
Jerome.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
Jerome.
> > Anca > >> >> Jerome. >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Anca >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -Vincent
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs