[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Clarification about the "More Actions" menu + extradcos tabs
Hi devs, Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own. The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu. So here’s a proposal: * The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries. WDYT? Thanks -Vincent
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we might need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, delete, etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix. I agree that View Source could be moved in Information. Thanks, Caty On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we might need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, delete, etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix.
The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information about the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” any more (since there are others information entries). It could be named “More Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”.
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries? Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for displaying the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and its first line is: #if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras) Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we might need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, delete, etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix.
The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information about the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” any more (since there are others information entries). It could be named “More Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”.
As mentioned on our previous chat, I see the 2nd section of More Actions as a "viewers" section. It`s probably inspired also by the way they are implemented (/view/Page?viewer=<name>) Another way of looking at it would be to see the page as an object, where the 2nd section of "More Actions" would be the "getter" methods. Remember this proposal http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/NestedMenuReorganization#H1.... ? :) Looking at it this way, allows "Information" to stay where it is, IMO, as I`m also not a big fan of promoting the backlinks and included pages in the menus. Also, remember that included pages is displayed in edit mode, in the panel, which is, IMO, a better suited location anyway. Thanks, Eduard
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries?
Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for displaying the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and its first line is:
#if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras)
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 18 Mar 2016, at 14:58, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we might need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, delete, etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix.
The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information about the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” any more (since there are others information entries). It could be named “More Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”.
As mentioned on our previous chat, I see the 2nd section of More Actions as a "viewers" section. It`s probably inspired also by the way they are implemented (/view/Page?viewer=<name>)
Saying “viewer” (which is a technical term that I believe doesn’t mean anything to users) or saying it contains “Information about the page” is the same thing. Saying “viewer” just hides the semantic meaning.
Another way of looking at it would be to see the page as an object, where the 2nd section of "More Actions" would be the "getter" methods.
That’s even more technical. Remember that we’re talking users here ;)
Remember this proposal http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/NestedMenuReorganization#H1.... ? :)
Looking at it this way, allows "Information" to stay where it is, IMO, as I`m also not a big fan of promoting the backlinks and included pages in the menus. Also, remember that included pages is displayed in edit mode, in the panel, which is, IMO, a better suited location anyway.
This is just hiding the fact that the links all contain information about the current page. You can call it metadata, viewers or whatever you want it’s still about data (i.e. information) of the current page. And since all other viewer links are also about this there’s no reason to have one called with the generic name. Basically what “information” means here is “all the other metadata for the page”. But it’s not a big issue. We don’t need to be 100% logical in the UI. Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Eduard
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries?
Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for displaying the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and its first line is:
#if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras)
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 14:58, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]
wrote:
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we
might
need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, delete, etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix.
The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information about the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” any more (since there are others information entries). It could be named “More Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”.
As mentioned on our previous chat, I see the 2nd section of More Actions as a "viewers" section. It`s probably inspired also by the way they are implemented (/view/Page?viewer=<name>)
Saying “viewer” (which is a technical term that I believe doesn’t mean anything to users) or saying it contains “Information about the page” is the same thing. Saying “viewer” just hides the semantic meaning.
Another way of looking at it would be to see the page as an object, where the 2nd section of "More Actions" would be the "getter" methods.
That’s even more technical. Remember that we’re talking users here ;)
I was not referring to simple users here, just trying to present it to you :)
Remember this proposal
http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/NestedMenuReorganization#H1....
...and this was a reminder on how it would look like if we would separate these viewers, since it`s not the first time we`ve had this idea, hinting that it`s a conclusion that is easy to reach, probably for simple users too.
? :)
Looking at it this way, allows "Information" to stay where it is, IMO, as I`m also not a big fan of promoting the backlinks and included pages in the menus. Also, remember that included pages is displayed in edit mode, in the panel, which is, IMO, a better suited location anyway.
This is just hiding the fact that the links all contain information about the current page. You can call it metadata, viewers or whatever you want it’s still about data (i.e. information) of the current page. And since all other viewer links are also about this there’s no reason to have one called with the generic name.
Basically what “information” means here is “all the other metadata for the page”.
But it’s not a big issue. We don’t need to be 100% logical in the UI.
Sure. Even so, I still find it relevant enough to have this ("Extra") "Information" docextra/viewer/etc. since it can be useful to display important stuff (specially to advanced users) that don`t really deserve a dedicated view. Examples of stuff I`d personally like to see in that tab: - Document Programming Right status (advanced) - Document Script Right status (advanced) - Document displayed with sheet X? (advanced) - Document lock status? - etc. Of course we can work on the naming if you like... tough it will be tough to find a better name IMO :) Thanks, Eduard
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Eduard
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries?
Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for
displaying
the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and its first line is:
#if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras)
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 14:58, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <
wrote:
To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we
might
need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy,
delete,
etc.) That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and the 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are somehow technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace Space Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix.
The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information about the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” any more (since there are others information entries). It could be named “More Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”.
As mentioned on our previous chat, I see the 2nd section of More Actions as a "viewers" section. It`s probably inspired also by the way they are implemented (/view/Page?viewer=<name>)
Saying “viewer” (which is a technical term that I believe doesn’t mean anything to users) or saying it contains “Information about the page” is the same thing. Saying “viewer” just hides the semantic meaning.
Another way of looking at it would be to see the page as an object, where the 2nd section of "More Actions" would be the "getter" methods.
That’s even more technical. Remember that we’re talking users here ;)
I was not referring to simple users here, just trying to present it to you :)
Remember this proposal
http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/NestedMenuReorganization#H1....
...and this was a reminder on how it would look like if we would separate these viewers, since it`s not the first time we`ve had this idea, hinting that it`s a conclusion that is easy to reach, probably for simple users too.
? :)
Looking at it this way, allows "Information" to stay where it is, IMO, as I`m also not a big fan of promoting the backlinks and included pages in the menus. Also, remember that included pages is displayed in edit mode, in the panel, which is, IMO, a better suited location anyway.
This is just hiding the fact that the links all contain information about the current page. You can call it metadata, viewers or whatever you want it’s still about data (i.e. information) of the current page. And since all other viewer links are also about this there’s no reason to have one called with the generic name.
Basically what “information” means here is “all the other metadata for the page”.
But it’s not a big issue. We don’t need to be 100% logical in the UI.
Sure. Even so, I still find it relevant enough to have this ("Extra") "Information" docextra/viewer/etc. since it can be useful to display important stuff (specially to advanced users) that don`t really deserve a dedicated view.
Examples of stuff I`d personally like to see in that tab: - Document Programming Right status (advanced) - Document Script Right status (advanced) - Document displayed with sheet X? (advanced) - Document lock status?
- If it's terminal or not
- etc.
Of course we can work on the naming if you like... tough it will be tough to find a better name IMO :)
Thanks, Eduard
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Eduard
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries?
Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for
displaying
the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and
its
first line is:
#if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras)
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition of some elements of my own.
The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu.
So here’s a proposal:
* The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to the information section * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: one for includes pages and one for backlinks * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and "Backlinks" only as menu entries.
WDYT?
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
On 18 Mar 2016, at 21:23, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
[snip]
Sure. Even so, I still find it relevant enough to have this ("Extra") "Information" docextra/viewer/etc. since it can be useful to display important stuff (specially to advanced users) that don`t really deserve a dedicated view.
Examples of stuff I`d personally like to see in that tab: - Document Programming Right status (advanced) - Document Script Right status (advanced) - Document displayed with sheet X? (advanced) - Document lock status?
- If it's terminal or not
Other ideas: - Computed permissions (with a click since it can take some time to compute) showing who has the various rights on this page (to view, edit, comment, delete, etc) - Other metadata of XWikiDocument: -- Syntax -- Content author (vs author and creator) and content update date (vs creation date and update date) (advanced) -- custom class (advanced) -- whether the doc holds an XClass and which one (advanced) -- list of xobjects (advanced) -- default template (advanced) Thanks -Vincent
- etc.
Of course we can work on the naming if you like... tough it will be tough to find a better name IMO :)
Thanks, Eduard
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Eduard
I agree that View Source could be moved in Information.
Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries?
Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for
displaying
the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and
its
first line is:
#if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras)
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks, Caty
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi devs, > > Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + addition > of some elements of my own. > > The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu. > > So here’s a proposal: > > * The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't > contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: > ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share > ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, > Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments > * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be moved to > the information section > * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific since > the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. It used > to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now are > included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 viewers: > one for includes pages and one for backlinks > * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of the > "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. > * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, we > could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" and > "Backlinks" only as menu entries. > > WDYT? > > Thanks > -Vincent
participants (3)
-
Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) -
Eduard Moraru -
Vincent Massol