Hi all, On 09/17/2010 04:21 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

Hi Anca,

There were some concerns over the name "section" - name that I shamelessly ripped from confluence when working on that - see http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2963

I'm not such a big fan of section either. I would go for columnGroup , I think layout is a bit too general, it must be obvious it's about columns since it actually enforces the column macro inside. The other proposals were: columns -- too easy to mistake for column layout -- too general in my view What do others think? Thanks, Anca

Besides that, +1

Jerome.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib (https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On 09/17/2010 09:47 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

I prefer "columns" to "columnGroup"

Same here. +1 for moving them to the platform. Thanks, Marius

But perhaps that's the pom.xml living in the programmer talking here...

Jerome.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi all,

On 09/17/2010 04:21 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

Hi Anca,

There were some concerns over the name "section" - name that I shamelessly ripped from confluence when working on that - see http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2963

I'm not such a big fan of section either.

I would go for

columnGroup

, I think layout is a bit too general, it must be obvious it's about columns since it actually enforces the column macro inside.

The other proposals were: columns -- too easy to mistake for column layout -- too general in my view

What do others think?

Thanks, Anca

...

Besides that, +1

Jerome.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib (https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ 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

Hi, On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 17:40, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

+1 as well. Guillaume

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib ( https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

---

devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Nice approach, +1. JV. On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section&  macro columns from the contrib (https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

---

devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

I don't like too much "container", it's not very explicit its use is "layouting". Do you see there are other uses? Why not "{{layout style='columns'}}" ? Also, if you abandon the column macro, you abandon the possibility to its potential parameters. Still one could use group parameters as a replacement, but you cannot achieve exactly the same (from the WYSIWYG interaction perspective for example). +0 anyway Jerome.

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib ( https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

---

devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:

On 09/20/2010 06:16 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

I don't like too much "container", it's not very explicit its use is "layouting". Do you see there are other uses? Why not "{{layout style='columns'}}" ?

For example you could use it to also provide borders, and size, eventually ending up implementing the box as a special case of container macro.

...

Also, if you abandon the column macro, you abandon the possibility to its potential parameters.

This is a very good argument actually, particularly if we think about the simple case of columns that take percents of the page width, the percent should be passable as a parameter of the column macro, I don't like the idea of specially parsing the group parameters.

WDYT?

Also if we think about a border layout (a la Swing), we'd need a group to specify its position.

In this case, a new vote would be for the name of the inner macro, which needs to have a suggestive name. Proposals:

a) content b) item c) group d) widget e) part f) element g) entity

I like "item" could be containerItem, containerElement ? "group" is too technical IMHO.

My +1 for c).

WDYT? in general about this limitation and in particular about the name of the macro to use.

...

Still one could use group parameters as a replacement, but you cannot achieve exactly the same (from the WYSIWYG interaction perspective for example).

The wysiwyg cannot handle nested macros in any case,

I know, but I dare to hope they be supported at some point :) Jerome.

at least not for the moment and I don't think it's really that much envisaged.

Thanks, Anca

...

+0 anyway

Jerome.

...

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib (

https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/)

...

...

...

in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ 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

Hi all, On 09/21/2010 05:55 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:

On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:27 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

On 09/20/2010 06:16 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

I don't like too much "container", it's not very explicit its use is "layouting". Do you see there are other uses? Why not "{{layout style='columns'}}" ?

For example you could use it to also provide borders, and size, eventually ending up implementing the box as a special case of container macro.

...

Also, if you abandon the column macro, you abandon the possibility to its potential parameters.

This is a very good argument actually, particularly if we think about the simple case of columns that take percents of the page width, the percent should be passable as a parameter of the column macro, I don't like the idea of specially parsing the group parameters.

WDYT?

Also if we think about a border layout (a la Swing), we'd need a group to specify its position.

In this case, a new vote would be for the name of the inner macro, which needs to have a suggestive name. Proposals:

a) content b) item c) group d) widget e) part f) element g) entity

I like "item"

could be containerItem, containerElement ?

"group" is too technical IMHO.

It's possible to use any kind of parameter for groups (parameters aren't restricted to parameters having a meaning in HTML) so I don't see this as a problem at all.

After a discussion that clearified some of my concerns about the role of (%%) parameters, I am quite convinced that it's ok to use groups params, and we should stick to using groups. Since everybody agreed with groups before, except for Jerome who raised the parameters issue, I will consider those as real +1s for this solution, and Jerome's vote as a +0, so no -. The main advantage of using groups is not redefining something with the same purpose, especially because of it being a special case (see below Vincent's remarks about handling macros that cannot be used toplevel). I will prepare this solution and commit. Thanks, Anca

The only thing we would need to agree and it's more general than this issue is how to introduce namespaces for parameters since otherwise we would have potential collisions. We discussed it a long time ago if I remember correctly but we've not really worked on it.

I will try to see what I can do about that, for this case.

My idea would be to introduce an "html" namespace for parameters and a "layout" namespace for the layout/container macro. The XHTML renderer would copy as is any parameter in the "html" namespace.

Some examples:

(% html:style="...." %) whatever

{{layout/container...}} (% layout:position = "south" %) ((( ... ))) {{/layout/container}}

Now I don't personally really care whether we use groups or a macro but I find it better to reuse something that exists and that is meant for this purpose rather than invent a new thing. Also with a macro we'd need (if we want to be perfect) to find a way so that the macro isn't displayed as a top level macro available in the WYSIWYG but only as a macro that is made available when editing the content of the layout/container macro. In the first place we could simply not do this of course and have a check inside the nested macro so that it checks what macro is its parent and display an error if not used correctly but it's not perfect.

Thanks -Vincent

...

...

My +1 for c).

WDYT? in general about this limitation and in particular about the name of the macro to use.

...

Still one could use group parameters as a replacement, but you cannot achieve exactly the same (from the WYSIWYG interaction perspective for example).

The wysiwyg cannot handle nested macros in any case,

I know, but I dare to hope they be supported at some point :)

Jerome.

...

at least not for the moment and I don't think it's really that much envisaged.

Thanks, Anca

...

+0 anyway

Jerome.

...

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib (

https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/)

...

...

...

in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca

---

devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 18:50, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:

On 09/20/2010 06:16 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]>  wrote:

...

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

I don't like too much "container", it's not very explicit its use is "layouting". Do you see there are other uses?  Why not "{{layout style='columns'}}" ?

For example you could use it to also provide borders, and size, eventually ending up implementing the box as a special case of container macro.

...

Also, if you abandon the column macro, you abandon the possibility to its potential parameters.

This is a very good argument actually, particularly if we think about the simple case of columns that take percents of the page width, the percent should be passable as a parameter of the column macro, I don't like the idea of specially parsing the group parameters.

WDYT?

Also if we think about a border layout (a la Swing), we'd need a group to specify its position.

In this case, a new vote would be for the name of the inner macro, which needs to have a suggestive name. Proposals:

a) content b) item c) group d) widget e) part f) element g) entity

My +1 for c).

WDYT? in general about this limitation and in particular about the name of the macro to use.

...

Still one could use group parameters as a replacement, but you cannot achieve exactly the same (from the WYSIWYG interaction perspective for example).

The wysiwyg cannot handle nested macros in any case, at least not for the moment and I don't think it's really that much envisaged.

Actually it is envisaged thanks to http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-5496 ;)

Thanks, Anca

...

+0 anyway

Jerome.

...

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section&   macro columns from the contrib ( https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/) in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ 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

-- Thomas Mortagne

Hi Denis, On 09/21/2010 09:37 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote:

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 18:50, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

On 09/20/2010 06:16 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi devs,

actually after a discussion I had with Vincent about naming, we thought of the following approach, for a more general purpose:

1/ section turns into ** container ** and it gets a parameter called **layoutStyle** to specify the type of layout for its contents. One of the possible values of this param would be "columns" and it would be the only one implemented for the moment.

2/ the content of this container macro would be a **list of groups**, wiki syntax groups, like ((( ... ))). There's no point of having a macro that does nothing else but specify that some items should be grouped together.

With these, the syntax of columned content would now be:

{{container layoutStyle="columns"}} ((( some wiki content ))) ((( some other wiki content))) {{/container}}

I don't like too much "container", it's not very explicit its use is "layouting". Do you see there are other uses? Why not "{{layout style='columns'}}" ?

For example you could use it to also provide borders, and size, eventually ending up implementing the box as a special case of container macro.

...

Also, if you abandon the column macro, you abandon the possibility to its potential parameters.

This is a very good argument actually, particularly if we think about the simple case of columns that take percents of the page width, the percent should be passable as a parameter of the column macro, I don't like the idea of specially parsing the group parameters.

WDYT?

I am not sure I get your idea. Either we do not have parameters on the inner macro, and using ((( ))) groups are the best. This means that parameters for groups are provided on the container macro. Is this really nice, do you like html colgroups ?

Well no, if we want parameters for the inner groups, then every group needs to define its own parameters. Another option would be to use ((( ))) groups for when there are no params, and when we start needing parameters, we add an alternative syntax based on a macro. This way both should work, in the case of a group with no params ((( and {{{group}}} being equivalent.

Or we need parameter on the inner macro, and...

...

Also if we think about a border layout (a la Swing), we'd need a group to specify its position.

In this case, a new vote would be for the name of the inner macro, which needs to have a suggestive name. Proposals:

a) content b) item c) group d) widget e) part f) element g) entity

My +1 for c).

WDYT? in general about this limitation and in particular about the name of the macro to use.

... why should we use a single name ?

The container macro (I would prefer "layout" like Jerome) may just be a container for multiple different group, and one of them could then be called "column", why not ?

Mainly because the inner macros don't do anything (at all) by themselves they're just markers for the outer macro to know how to deal with that group of content. Which is why we had the idea of using ((( ))) groups, to avoid having a macros that do nothing in the list of macros. The more macros that do nothing we plan, the worse (column, panel, gridbox, or who knows what other things we might want inside).

Have I missed some important issue related to the WYSIWYG or the macro implementation that prevent that ?

multiple macros inside? no, it's very possible. However wysiwyg doesn'r yet allow editing macro in macro.

If yes, I would even prefer to keep a specific columns/column macro, this would be clearer, even if this macro became an alias for something more generic latter.

in my view columns column is a little bad because they can be easily confused, but that's a different story. I think it's not such a good idea to add things that we know will disappear, because it's hard to make them disappear, and we're gonna endup with a bloated list of macros, from which half are aliases of the other half.

Moreover, I am not sure that the generic aspect of the implementation should be really shown externally, macro usage should not be reserve to programmers only (even if the WYSIWYG is a great tool), and the way of thinking of programmers is not a good example of the human way of thinking :)

While I agree with the fact that users would prefer more a macro which is called columns instead of a macro called container with a layout parameter that says columns, I don't think it's that bad and difficult to use. What do others think about these? Thanks, Anca

WDYT ?

Denis

...

Still one could use group parameters as a replacement,

...

but you cannot achieve exactly the same (from the WYSIWYG interaction perspective for example).

The wysiwyg cannot handle nested macros in any case, at least not for the moment and I don't think it's really that much envisaged.

Thanks, Anca

...

+0 anyway

Jerome.

...

The dashboard macro would then just delegate to a container macro with columns layout style.

I like this approach, +1.

WDYT?

Once I get your votes, I will commit this in the platform.

Thanks, Anca

On 09/17/2010 03:56 PM, Anca Luca wrote:

...

Hi devs,

wdyt about committing the section& macro columns from the contrib (

https://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/projects/xwiki-macro-column/)

...

...

...

in the platform macros, along with a first, very simple implementation of the dashboard macro (which for the moment only delegates to the section macro)?

This would be the first step towards the implementation of the dashboard, and the plan is to be done before 2.5M2.

Here's my +1.

WDYT? Anca _______________________________________________ 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