7 Jun
2010
7 Jun
'10
11:24 a.m.
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:50, Ecaterina Valica <valicac(a)gmail.com> wrote:
or
be
By putting the information in the tooltip regarding the origin of
inheritance, avoiding the needs to read that information separately for each
rights, but having it displayed simultaneously in a column.
No, I would just remove the basic view in favor of a advance one, so there
which
Why not, this should be tried to see what it provide. I am not sure this
will be used often, since rights regarding a given level are usually not so
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 01:53, Denis Gervalle
<dgl(a)softec.lu> wrote:
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/i…
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/c…
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/r…
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/r…
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal
instead
This is perfect, but you should include a little timeout for the tooltips,
is
like
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal#H…
information
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal#H…
(full
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights43Propos…
are
married
The
but
since
> it
> > > is
> > > > confusing, too large, and not significant. It will be even more
> > > unexpected
> > > > if you follow me on the "advance user" case, when a basic
user look
add
Personally I would prefer the text variant. If not, I do not see the point
Hi Caty,
I am glad to see that others are looking at what we do, and it is good
time
for them to comment now, since I will not have
many more comments now :)
I
have replied to some of your comment below...
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 18:54, Ecaterina Valica <valicac(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi,
Take a look at Rights 5
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights5Space
Added:
* information regarding the advanced rights (inherits, overrides)
* icons built together as a whole
*
representation of "advanced rights" with the same abstract icon, but
with
different color (no text; we can debate this)
*
inheritance arrow married with +/-
IMGs (in case of browser problem)
- collapsed:
-
expanded:
>
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:42, Denis Gervalle <dgl(a)softec.lu> wrote:
>
> > Hi Caty,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 18:09, Ecaterina Valica <valicac(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Denis,
> > >
> > > I want to thank you again for all the help you are giving :P
> > >
> >
> > This is pleasure to participate especially because you provide really
> good
> > proposals.
> > I would also like to see others participating, currently the
discussion
is
becoming to much bilateral IMO.
>
> Please take a look at a proposal for "V3 and my 3)" version with
elements
> from Rights2 :)
>
> >
and in "action"
> >
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Space
Really nice job ! I really appreciate.
> The prototype is not reflecting the "desired" interaction: both
inherited
> > info and rights change appear on hover (right icon and arrow), of
> > hover | click.
> >
>
> I am not sure what are really your intend. I think that the big
tooltips
> describing the rights should be the only
tooltips, and should be show
on
hover
only after a small timeout (like the yellow one currently).
Clicking
any where on the +/- icon or v would then open
the menu.
Is it what you try ?
yes, on hover show the tooltip, on click show the menu. or it will be too much invasive.
From the reaction of Alex and Raluca, I really hope you will be able to
implement the correct interaction in your samples, since this seems to
cause
a lot of confusion. If you can't, let me know, I will try to find some
time
to have a look at it.
wrote:
>
> >
> > That "v" needs to be an arrow like the one we use in the action
menus.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 19:06, Denis Gervalle <dgl(a)softec.lu> > > >
> > > > Caty,
> > > >
> > > > Really nice and interesting post, I will try to reach that
level...
but
> > > without visual :\
> > >
> > > I really think that using the collapsed view for editing would
helps
> > basic
> > > users to have a simplified and more easy interface to understand.
We
> > may
> > > > even imagine that only "advanced user" (those marked so in
their
> > > profile),
> > > > has access to the expanded view.
> > > >
> > > > I think that the collapsed view missed an additional icon that
> > summarize
> > > > the
> > > > rights that are not shown. This one would only be shown if there
> any
> > > > non-defaulted additional right in action.
> > >
> > > This is a signal that extended
> > > > rights are in use (See it like the grey box of Windows when
special
> >
rights
> > > are setup, which is inviting to go into advanced view to know
more).
> > This
> > > > one would be obviously not editable, and should probably work > the
> > > ...
> > > > or replace it ? In place of the ... . Concerning the ..., I am
not
> > sure,
> > > > but
> > > > I would also prefer to see a textual link "advanced" in
small
font,
and
> > only
> > visible when row is hovered.
> >
> >
>
>
Sorry to insist, but the information regarding the advanced rights is
still
missing in collapsed mode.
I really would like to have a indicator that some advanced rights has
been
set locally or not without having to go advanced
mode. Else, you will
have
to expand all rows to check that information,
which is not practical.
>
>
> > Order of right are not significant, so I would prefer that in all
view,
> > these where in the same order, with the
basic right first
(V/C/E/D/A/P)
> and
> > the additional right in their order of registration (hope that it
will
> > stay
> > > constant... or we will have to find a way to keep them ordered).
> > > The "right" part of each icon should be grayed if the right is
> inherited
> > > and
> > > not grayed if the right is set locally, this improve the > >
provided in V3.
>
>
>
>
> > >
> > > The problem with this icons (taken from Silk) is that there is
little
> >
difference for View, Comment, Admin icons between the two states
> > (inherited,
> > locally set) - but this is something we can easily improve (by
changing
> > the
> > > icons and looking for some more contrast).
> > > Example: This is how they look when all rights are set locally color)
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > I also think that the +/- (which is never grayed) could be
> > > > nearer to the right icon. Maybe you could use a green V and a
read
>
"stop"
> > > in
> > > place of +/- ?
> > >
> >
> > The other mockup versions (like
> >
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights41Space
> )
> > > used
> > > v/x for the allow/deny representation, and yes, I agree that they > > more
> > > suited than +/-.
> > >
> > > The problem is that we are using in XWiki, X to represent delete,
so
> > having
> > > two xX was too much, that's why I introduced +/-. Maybe we can find
> > another
> > > solution.
> > >
> >
> > I think we need some polishing on the icons used. Building them
> > specifically
> > would be nice, but I do not know if you or anyone want to have a try
at
>
that. My feeling is that the couple +/- or better v/x and the right
icon
> > should be built together and closer to each other providing the
> information
> > as a whole and not giving the impression of two part. Using a v for
> > suggesting the menu is nice, could be even improved by styling some
> "button
> > like" borders on hover.
> >
> > All menus could also be improved by using the inheritance arrow > > with
> > +/- (or v/x) to show immediately what will be the right if
inheritance
is
> > used.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the collapsed view, I see three possibilities to
> investigate
> > > for
> > > > allowing edition while improving readability (note that
readability
> has
> > > the
> > > > same issue in expanded view, but it seems to be less annoying) :
> > > >
> > > > 1) use V3, but when hovering a row, use V2 on that row and allow
> > > drag/drop
> > > > (keeping V2 until drop even is hover is temporary lost). Not sure
> this
> > > will
> > > > be nice in practice ? see 2)
> > > >
> > > > 2) use a presentation in 4 columns, for both collapsed and
expanded
>
view,
> > > the first column behing a read-only summary like V3, and the 3
column
> > > being
> > > > an ordered V1. However, dragging from summary would be allowed.
3
> > > > detailed column could be shown only when a drag is started from
> > summary,
> > > or
> > > > with a global horizontal expansion button... Basic user would
have
> > access
> > > > to
> > > > this, but not necessarily to vertical row expansion. Not sure
this
is
> > not
> > > > an
> > > > increase in complexity ? so, see 3)
> > > >
> > > > 3) use V3, and a similar interface to what we have in current
right
> >
> management interface. Since saved are postponed (not like we have
> > > currently), using this one may be both practical and could helps
the
> > > transition for existing user as
well. With all the belts and
whistle
> > > added
> > > > to clearly state changes and inheritance, this will be similar really
> > better than what we have.
> >
> > If we go for V3 and my 3) proposal, I also wonder if the current
table
> > > header is well done. I do not like it when nothing is expanded > at
> > > it.
> > > > Maybe you could try a changing header, only expanding when there
is
> >
> expanded
> > > row, or, you could move the expanded header in each expanded row,
> keeping
> > a
> > > simplified header at the top.
> > >
> > > WDYT ?
> > >
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > Other problem that this proposal has is the representation of
"advanced
> > > rights". If we don't like the textual description and we want to
> > icons,
> > > IMO we have two solutions:
> > >
> > > A) use the same abstract icon, but with different color, ex. a key
or
> > lock
> > > icon with color representation ("blue" for
"programming", "green"
for
> > > "captchaComment", etc)
> > > - the problem here is for the people that have some kind color
> blindness
> > > and
> > > will not distinguish between some color tones (this is the case
when
we
a
> > gonna have lots of "advanced"
| non default rights)
> >
> > B) use the same abstract icon and with an order index (like numbers
1,
2,
> > etc or characters A, B, etc)
> >
> > These representations are based on the fact that "advanced rights"
will
> > be
> > > added by other developers and the icon will not be custom made for >
specif
> > right.
> >
>
> Why not just use the big Icons from the menu (using the inheritance
arrow
married
with +/- as proposed above), and directly followed by the v
arrow.
All this in front of the text ?
inheritance arrow + "right" - to describe "right" as inherited
allowed
inheritance arrow - "right" - to describe "right" as inherited
denied
+ "right" - to describe "right" allowed
- "right" - to describe "right" denied
yes - we could do that if we decide to use the textual variant.
to expand vertically, just put all on a single
row.
The reason they are put on two rows is the one you gave me:
"helps basic users to have a simplified and more easy interface to
understand. We may even imagine that only 'advanced user' (those marked so
in their profile), has access to the expanded view.
If we are gonna add rights per application, then we
will have a separation
between the "basic rights" and the "extended/advanced rights". The
"basic
rights" are the ones that any admin should know about and that cover the
most important functions of the wiki.
"Extended rights" could be easy ignored by admins (especially beginners
admins), that can rely on their default status. If we put all the rights on
the same row, we are giving them the same importance and the admins will
feel the need to learn and set them all. IMO, programming will fit in the
"extended rights" section.
Also, if we are using icons, I prefer all rights should be represented with
icons because of the consistency. There is no need to have two
representations for elements that do the same thing (if all are rights than
they should all act like it, look like it, etc)
I am afraid that advanced right will be difficult to iconize clearly.
Moreover, once the set of items became large, icons are not an easy way to
recognize each item, so using text will helps more than keeping consistency.
>
> >
> > Using a generic icon will not improve information and detailed view
of
>
advanced right in collapsed mode is not expected.
>
> It is not clearly shown on your samples, how multiple advance right
would
> > be
> > shown. I think one per row is nice, or if you want to limit space, 2 3
> > at
> > most, shown in columns ?
> >
>
> this depends on which version (textual, icons) we choose for the
advanced
rights (I
would prefer something linear)
I do not agree, I see basic as an horizontal presentation and advance to a vertical more detailed variant. Maybe the
inheritance information from
the
tootips could be put in a second column when displaying advanced mode.
With what information the right represented in the collapsed mode will be
more detailed than in the expanded one? By having the name written explicit
in text? This is not enough and when you have icons
that are use elsewhere
in the wiki, the user learns the meaning and doesn't need the textual info
so bad.
What you are telling me is like the version 4.2, when the collapse mode was
just a summary of the expanded mode. But when we moved in the collapse mode
the functionality (changing the right/drag), then the collapsed mode began
to represent the interface and not the summary any more.
As I have said, I see the collapsed mode as a basic interface, and the
advanced mode as an advanced interface. Two way to display information, and
to interact with it. Basic users will never look at advanced mode which is
more for admins. Be careful that setting page right could be a user task,
not an admin task. What I have said is that we could even limit access to
advanced mode to advanced users, like what we do with the edit menu.
That's why I removed the duplicates from the expanded mode. There is no use
to put the same actions/info twice. This only will overload the interface
and will bring few/to none improvements.
It will if it display the inheritance source in a column. For right set at
current level this column could even precise what inheritance has been
overwritten, both in terms of allowance and origin.
Denis.
>
>
> > I also wonder is this would help or not to also extends basic rights
in
advanced mode, showing the icons and the text ?
I think this would only add duplicates and mess a bit the meaning of
"advanced" by combining them with "regular".
is no duplication, just a more detailed view of
the same information.
> Good point. Here is some proposal for each column:
>
> 1) a dropdown list proposing local (default), global or both ?
>
I would prefer rights separation depending on the location:
- if you want to see global rights - go to global;
- if you want to see wiki rights - go to wiki,
etc.
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights3Proposal#HN…
>
> Another thing we need to consider for this proposal is how the
filtering
> is
> > gonna be made.
> >
> Why would you like to see both local and global? (filtering?) I think
it
will be
easier for the user if they are separated.
This is not global in term of right, it is about showing local user/group
or
global user/group. In a farm, the user xwiki:XWiki.Admin may receive
special
right on mywiki:MySpace.MyPage. So, the filtering would be to filter user are shown. This is exactly what the current
interface do. Hiding
global
user by default is done so because knowing about global user is an
advanced
usage that basic users ignore.
So, once again, this has nothing to do with the inheritance of rigths,
but
about the origin of the user. And the first
column is about user/group,
so
it coud fit that need.
k. Thanks for explaining that. It will be added to the display of filters.
2) a textbox which filter on names
For advanced users would be nice to have queries, like "allow view" AND
"inherit deny delete" :)
I was filtering on user/group name here, since second columns is about
user/group names and does not relate to rights.
3) a dropdown list proposing all (default), hide
inherited only, and
maybe
the list of rights, showing only rows where the
selected right is set
locally ?
The dropdown with the list of rights (view, edit, etc.) could also have
another dropdown next to it to set the state of the right (inherited,
allowed, denied)
complex that you are unable to read them all. I
have seen interesting to
hide inherited only rows, because these are not show currently in the
interface, and this could be useful to revert to current view, especially
for user that has already used this interface.
I'll do a filter representation to see how is gonna look like.
I hope this is clearer. I really hope that we will now receive more
feedback... and that we will be able to implement this in the near future
on
top of the new implementation of the right service from Andreas.
Anyway,congratulation for this great piece of work.
Thanks Denis again for all the input,
Caty
Denis
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Thanks,
Caty
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users