Hi, I agree with Paul on this. To me, it could work a bit like the "hidden doc" checkmark. We can show it only for advanced users and/or admins if needed. The current practice, which implies putting a {{velocity}} tag with docextra = [] on each home page feels a bit antiquated... As for the list itself, it looks good to me as well. Thanks, Guillaume On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Paul Libbrecht <[email protected]> wrote:

Would it make sense, in this case, to make a checkbox that is displayed to admins in case the docextra tab is hidden? (maybe this would edit a webpreferences object?)

It seems to me that the desire to hide the docextra tab is for any page that displays some kind of summary: you'd expect the docextra function on "data pages" not on "summary pages"; i suppose this is likely to be the case of many other pages.

Paul

...

Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <mailto:[email protected]> 14 octobre 2015 19:19 Hi,

#docextra tabs are particular important for content pages where users are encouraged to comment, attach, revise history, etc.

But since XWiki is more than a wiki and the application usage has expanded, we removed the #docextra tab from many XWiki Contrib applications, like: File Manager, Forum, Calendar, etc.

The logic behind was that the applications have as main purpose the management of applications entities, not commenting for example.

Also with the Flamingo Skin, the shortcuts to Comments, Attachments, etc. can be found in the 'More actions' menu.

So, my question to you is: What do you think about removing the #docextra also for default/bundled applications like: - Blog.WebHome - Dashboard.WebHome - Panels.WebHome - Scheduler.WebHome - Stats.WebHome - Main.WebHome?

If we adopt this practice we could document it on: http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HApplicationDesign or

http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDevelopmentBestPrac...

...

Thanks, Caty

Hi, Thanks Vincent for providing implementation ideas. The "Page metadata visibility" options should be part of the "Page Administration". There is an older proposal for this http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/PageAdministration Images: http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/PageAdministration/C... http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/PageAdministration/C... Until we implement http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-12497 and since we are planning to provide backwards compatibility support I plan to fix this issue now by using the velocity variable $docextra. Thanks, Caty On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:41 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

On 15 Oct 2015 at 09:10:36, Guillaume Lerouge ([email protected](mailto: [email protected])) wrote:

...

Hi,

I agree with Paul on this. To me, it could work a bit like the "hidden doc" checkmark. We can show it only for advanced users and/or admins if needed.

Since there are plenty of use cases and they depend on the wiki and the condition could be as complex as can imagine, I’d do it like this:

* Add a new XObject to control the display of the docextra tab and its elements. This XObject should have 2 properties: ** One being a multi-select Select to choose the tabs to hide (Comments, History, etc) ** The other being a textarea property where we can put script and if this script evaluates to true (some variable is set to true) then hide the selected items from the Select.

* For backward-compatibility we should continue to honor the velocity variables * We should also continue to offer space-level settings (Page Elements option in the Admin UI), see https://www.evernote.com/l/AHd7c8OU6edOd7rBKqIqXpxzFweaMV4LzM0 but we should also refactor it to use a multi-select Select instead to make it easier to decide to display none or all of the tabs.

Alternative 1: * Instead of an XObject, put this inside the Page-level Administration (the 2 fields) and also add the script field for Space-level admin for consistency

Alternative 2: * Instead of having 2 xproperties in the XObject only have a single script field and set the docextra velocity variables in there (based on some conditions if we want).

Alternative 3: * Add a radio group xproperty in the XObject for predefined behavior (if the script xproperty is filled then it takes precedence). I can think of 2 predefined values in the radio group: ** “Always hide” ** “Hide for Simple Users"

...

The current practice, which implies putting a {{velocity}} tag with docextra = [] on each home page feels a bit antiquated…

As mentioned above, note that we have a UI, see https://www.evernote.com/l/AHd7c8OU6edOd7rBKqIqXpxzFweaMV4LzM0

WDYT?

Thanks -Vincent

...

As for the list itself, it looks good to me as well.

Thanks,

Guillaume

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:

...

Would it make sense, in this case, to make a checkbox that is displayed to admins in case the docextra tab is hidden? (maybe this would edit a webpreferences object?)

It seems to me that the desire to hide the docextra tab is for any page that displays some kind of summary: you'd expect the docextra function on "data pages" not on "summary pages"; i suppose this is likely to be the case of many other pages.

Paul

...

Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 14 octobre 2015 19:19 Hi,

#docextra tabs are particular important for content pages where users are encouraged to comment, attach, revise history, etc.

But since XWiki is more than a wiki and the application usage has expanded, we removed the #docextra tab from many XWiki Contrib applications, like: File Manager, Forum, Calendar, etc.

The logic behind was that the applications have as main purpose the management of applications entities, not commenting for example.

Also with the Flamingo Skin, the shortcuts to Comments, Attachments, etc. can be found in the 'More actions' menu.

So, my question to you is: What do you think about removing the #docextra also for default/bundled applications like: - Blog.WebHome - Dashboard.WebHome - Panels.WebHome - Scheduler.WebHome - Stats.WebHome - Main.WebHome?

If we adopt this practice we could document it on:

http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HApplicationDesign or

...

http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDevelopmentBestPrac...

...

...

Thanks, Caty

---

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

AFAIR, usecases like these (together with rights management) were the reason why most of us agreed that page administration is a good thing to have, in addition to the existing space administration. They might be a bit cosmeticized now with NS/ND, but the idea should remain the same (2 admin sections, 1 for space and 1 for individual page that overrides the space settings). That is at least for the presentational level. On the implementation side (actually, still mostly talking in functionality terms), I would (ideally) view this as more or less of a skin customization section, where the skin is pretty much a collection of extension points. In this case, it would mean filtering the #docextra extension point, defined by the #docextra UIX inserted in the #afterContent UIXP that is defined by the skin's layout. More generally speaking, we should be able to control if a particular UIX will be displayed on the current page/space/wiki by specifying some velocity script that would return true/false, as Vincent suggested. All of this should be seen as configuration, even if the rules are bits of code. Back to our example, we need to be able to set a rule for the #docextra UIX. I know it's a bit far fetched from our current state, but IMO until we reach a level where skins are defined as collections of extension points and configurations of UIX/UIXPs, we will struggle each time we introduce a new skin and each time we have a particular skin problem for which we will introduce a new custom mechanism to keep track of and maintain. A skin editor with a palette of UIXP/UIX to drag&drop from + the ability to generically override the skin's configuration at various levels in the page hierarchy would be pretty awesome. Now, back to the real world, probably the simplest would be to display a new option (e.g. "Show Page Extra Sections") in this list https://www.evernote.com/shard/s119/sh/7b73c394-e9e7-4e77-bac1-2aa22a5e9c73/... under Page Administration. Thanks, Eduard On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:41 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

On 15 Oct 2015 at 09:10:36, Guillaume Lerouge ([email protected](mailto: [email protected])) wrote:

...

Hi,

I agree with Paul on this. To me, it could work a bit like the "hidden doc" checkmark. We can show it only for advanced users and/or admins if needed.

Since there are plenty of use cases and they depend on the wiki and the condition could be as complex as can imagine, I’d do it like this:

* Add a new XObject to control the display of the docextra tab and its elements. This XObject should have 2 properties: ** One being a multi-select Select to choose the tabs to hide (Comments, History, etc) ** The other being a textarea property where we can put script and if this script evaluates to true (some variable is set to true) then hide the selected items from the Select.

* For backward-compatibility we should continue to honor the velocity variables * We should also continue to offer space-level settings (Page Elements option in the Admin UI), see https://www.evernote.com/l/AHd7c8OU6edOd7rBKqIqXpxzFweaMV4LzM0 but we should also refactor it to use a multi-select Select instead to make it easier to decide to display none or all of the tabs.

Alternative 1: * Instead of an XObject, put this inside the Page-level Administration (the 2 fields) and also add the script field for Space-level admin for consistency

Alternative 2: * Instead of having 2 xproperties in the XObject only have a single script field and set the docextra velocity variables in there (based on some conditions if we want).

Alternative 3: * Add a radio group xproperty in the XObject for predefined behavior (if the script xproperty is filled then it takes precedence). I can think of 2 predefined values in the radio group: ** “Always hide” ** “Hide for Simple Users"

...

The current practice, which implies putting a {{velocity}} tag with docextra = [] on each home page feels a bit antiquated…

As mentioned above, note that we have a UI, see https://www.evernote.com/l/AHd7c8OU6edOd7rBKqIqXpxzFweaMV4LzM0

WDYT?

Thanks -Vincent

...

As for the list itself, it looks good to me as well.

Thanks,

Guillaume

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:

...

Would it make sense, in this case, to make a checkbox that is displayed to admins in case the docextra tab is hidden? (maybe this would edit a webpreferences object?)

It seems to me that the desire to hide the docextra tab is for any page that displays some kind of summary: you'd expect the docextra function on "data pages" not on "summary pages"; i suppose this is likely to be the case of many other pages.

Paul

...

Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 14 octobre 2015 19:19 Hi,

#docextra tabs are particular important for content pages where users are encouraged to comment, attach, revise history, etc.

But since XWiki is more than a wiki and the application usage has expanded, we removed the #docextra tab from many XWiki Contrib applications, like: File Manager, Forum, Calendar, etc.

The logic behind was that the applications have as main purpose the management of applications entities, not commenting for example.

Also with the Flamingo Skin, the shortcuts to Comments, Attachments, etc. can be found in the 'More actions' menu.

So, my question to you is: What do you think about removing the #docextra also for default/bundled applications like: - Blog.WebHome - Dashboard.WebHome - Panels.WebHome - Scheduler.WebHome - Stats.WebHome - Main.WebHome?

If we adopt this practice we could document it on:

http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HApplicationDesign or

...

http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDevelopmentBestPrac...

...

...

Thanks, Caty

---

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

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:20 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

On 14 Oct 2015 at 19:19:26, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:

...

Hi,

#docextra tabs are particular important for content pages where users are encouraged to comment, attach, revise history, etc.

But since XWiki is more than a wiki and the application usage has expanded, we removed the #docextra tab from many XWiki Contrib applications, like: File Manager, Forum, Calendar, etc.

The logic behind was that the applications have as main purpose the management of applications entities, not commenting for example.

Also with the Flamingo Skin, the shortcuts to Comments, Attachments, etc. can be found in the 'More actions' menu.

So, my question to you is: What do you think about removing the #docextra also for default/bundled applications like: - Blog.WebHome

Maybe not just the home but also other pages such as Blog.ManageCategories.

This proposal was about WebHomes for now. Of course if we plan to go deep into other types of pages (like Blog.ManageCategories that can we extend to remove the docextra for all technical pages) we will need the UI for it. Thanks, Caty

...

- Dashboard.WebHome - Panels.WebHome - Scheduler.WebHome - Stats.WebHome - Main.WebHome?

I’m not sure about Main.WebHome.

Note that I’m -0 ATM. I’m not thrilled, especially if there’s no way to turn if on/off easily by some category of users.

Thanks -Vincent

...

If we adopt this practice we could document it on: http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HApplicationDesign or

http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDevelopmentBestPrac...

...

Thanks, Caty