[xwiki-devs] [discussion] Macro categories usage & multiple categories per macro
Hi guys, Short story: 1/ glorify macro categories and use them for more than presentational purposes (e.g. using a category to differentiate "gadgets" macros from other macros) 2/ allow a macro to be part of multiple categories at the same time WDYT? Long story: I have read http://markmail.org/thread/wwv56pojo6rix5zv about the current implementation for macro categories and I noticed that the discussion / approach there focuses on the presentational use of categories for macros, how to display them grouped to the user. I would say there's an important additional usecase, the usage of categories as macros metadata, describing their semantic, to allow some apps to implement different behaviour for macros in a category or another. For example, in the case of gadgets / dashboard, if a gadget would be implemented as a macro, then we'd need some sort of method to differentiate the macros that can be used as gadgets. The most 'semantic' way would be to use a gadgets category to mark the gadgets, and the dashboard implementation will allow only macros from this category to be added in the dashboard. However this approach would mean that macro category gains importance, and we need to think if it's still ok that an admin can change the category of a macro and the macro category declared by the author can be completely overwritten. WDYT about using the macro categories for much more than grouping for presentation? I'm +1, and I think that ftm there's no need to strategy change wrt to who establishes the category of a macro. Also, because of this, it's very possible that we might need a macro to be part of more than one category, because, to continue the example, we might want gadgets to also be grouped in several categories (of gadgets), or a gadget to also be included in the, say, "presentation" category of macros to be used in plain xwiki documents. WDYT? I am +1 for this as well, and ready to start building the patch (modulo some macros API changes) as soon as we all agree. Thanks, Anca
On 08/11/2010 02:46 PM, Anca Luca wrote:
Hi guys,
Short story: 1/ glorify macro categories and use them for more than presentational purposes (e.g. using a category to differentiate "gadgets" macros from other macros) 2/ allow a macro to be part of multiple categories at the same time
WDYT?
Long story: I have read http://markmail.org/thread/wwv56pojo6rix5zv about the current implementation for macro categories and I noticed that the discussion / approach there focuses on the presentational use of categories for macros, how to display them grouped to the user. I would say there's an important additional usecase, the usage of categories as macros metadata, describing their semantic, to allow some apps to implement different behaviour for macros in a category or another. For example, in the case of gadgets / dashboard, if a gadget would be implemented as a macro, then we'd need some sort of method to differentiate the macros that can be used as gadgets. The most 'semantic' way would be to use a gadgets category to mark the gadgets, and the dashboard implementation will allow only macros from this category to be added in the dashboard. However this approach would mean that macro category gains importance, and we need to think if it's still ok that an admin can change the category of a macro and the macro category declared by the author can be completely overwritten.
WDYT about using the macro categories for much more than grouping for presentation?
-0, I think you're trying to use categories for something that they weren't designed for. Their purpose is to help users find macros based on macro functionality and not based on implementation/technical details.
I'm +1, and I think that ftm there's no need to strategy change wrt to who establishes the category of a macro.
Also, because of this, it's very possible that we might need a macro to be part of more than one category, because, to continue the example, we might want gadgets to also be grouped in several categories (of gadgets), or a gadget to also be included in the, say, "presentation" category of macros to be used in plain xwiki documents.
WDYT?
-0, sounds like you want to transform categories in tags. I'm for keeping just one category per macro and adding other meta data (e.g. tags) if really needed. Thanks, Marius
I am +1 for this as well, and ready to start building the patch (modulo some macros API changes) as soon as we all agree.
Thanks, Anca
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
I think I remember discussing multiple categories when we did this and I was in favor of them. I'm not sure why we didn't do it. I agree that a macro can fit in several categories. Thanks -Vincent On Aug 11, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Anca Luca wrote:
Hi guys,
Short story: 1/ glorify macro categories and use them for more than presentational purposes (e.g. using a category to differentiate "gadgets" macros from other macros) 2/ allow a macro to be part of multiple categories at the same time
WDYT?
Long story: I have read http://markmail.org/thread/wwv56pojo6rix5zv about the current implementation for macro categories and I noticed that the discussion / approach there focuses on the presentational use of categories for macros, how to display them grouped to the user. I would say there's an important additional usecase, the usage of categories as macros metadata, describing their semantic, to allow some apps to implement different behaviour for macros in a category or another. For example, in the case of gadgets / dashboard, if a gadget would be implemented as a macro, then we'd need some sort of method to differentiate the macros that can be used as gadgets. The most 'semantic' way would be to use a gadgets category to mark the gadgets, and the dashboard implementation will allow only macros from this category to be added in the dashboard. However this approach would mean that macro category gains importance, and we need to think if it's still ok that an admin can change the category of a macro and the macro category declared by the author can be completely overwritten.
WDYT about using the macro categories for much more than grouping for presentation?
I'm +1, and I think that ftm there's no need to strategy change wrt to who establishes the category of a macro.
Also, because of this, it's very possible that we might need a macro to be part of more than one category, because, to continue the example, we might want gadgets to also be grouped in several categories (of gadgets), or a gadget to also be included in the, say, "presentation" category of macros to be used in plain xwiki documents.
WDYT?
I am +1 for this as well, and ready to start building the patch (modulo some macros API changes) as soon as we all agree.
Thanks, Anca
participants (3)
-
Anca Luca -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Vincent Massol