Re: [xwiki-devs] [Proposal][Glossary Application][Phase-1]

On 6 Jun 2017, at 15:59, Sarthak Gupta <sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com>

Hello Vincent, Created the first issue on Jira: https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/

How will I access the repo on xwiki-contrib? Whether some request is required on my part?

Thanks Sarthak Gupta On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Sarthak Gupta <sarthakgupta072(a)gmail.com wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > This is crystal clear to me. > Yes, I am totally ok with it. :) > > Thanks > Sarthak Gupta > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> 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: >>> >>>> Hi Sarthak, >>>> >>>>> 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 &

>> 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

>>>>> Glossary app home page(if I want to add styles to Glossary home

>> 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

>> 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

>>>> 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...​ >>>> >>> Can you explain your reasoning because it’s important you understand

>>>> 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

>>> 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? >> >> 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

>> 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

>> having various definitions. Now that said, having several definitions

>> 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

>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Sarthak, >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 26 May 2017, at 16:36, Sarthak Gupta <

>>>>>> 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/GlossaryApp >> lication> >>>> . >>>>>>> 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

>>>>>> >>>>>> 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

>>>> 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] >> >> >