On 30 May 2012 22:16, Sean Cooper <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Paul Sharples <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 30/05/2012 19:18, Jasha Joachimsthal wrote: > >> > >> On 30 May 2012 19:11, Paul Sharples<[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> On 30/05/2012 16:52, Jasha Joachimsthal wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 30 May 2012 17:44, Paul > >>>> Sharples<[email protected].**uk<[email protected]>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 30/05/2012 16:08, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Content preview:> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Content analysis details: (-10.0 points, 5.0 required) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> pts rule name description > >>>>>> ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------**** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------------------- > >>>>>> -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at > >>>>>> http://www.dnswl.org/, > >>>>>> high > >>>>>> trust > >>>>>> [140.211.11.3 listed in list.dnswl.org > ] > >>>>>> -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover > >>>>>> relay > >>>>>> > >>>>>> domain > >>>>>> -3.0 RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED RBL: Sender is in Return Path Certified > >>>>>> (trusted > >>>>>> relay) > >>>>>> [Return Path SenderScore Certified > >>>>>> (formerly] > >>>>>> [Bonded Sender) -<http://www.** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> senderscorecertified.com<http:**//www.senderscorecertified.com< > http://www.senderscorecertified.com> > >>>>>> **>>] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -2.0 RCVD_IN_RP_SAFE RBL: Sender is in Return Path Safe > >>>>>> (trusted > >>>>>> relay) > >>>>>> [Return Path SenderScore Safe List > >>>>>> (formerly] > >>>>>> [Habeas Safelist) -<http://www.** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> senderscorecertified.com<http:**//www.senderscorecertified.com< > http://www.senderscorecertified.com> > >>>>>> **>>] > >>>>>> Return-Path: dev-return-5463-P.Sharples=**bol** > >>>>>> [email protected]**<[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 May 2012 15:09:06.0689 (UTC) > >>>>>> FILETIME=[284E3710:01CD3E76] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Jasha > >>>>>>> Joachimsthal > >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 10:26 AM > >>>>>>> To: [email protected] > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Team Pages > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 30 May 2012 16:10, Sean Cooper<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Is anyone currently working on team pages, or working on defining > a > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> structure for it? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'd like to take a crack at defining it this week, but I don't > want > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> interrupt anyone that might already be working on the problem. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -Sean > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I am planning to work on it, but it's not clear yet when. So if > you > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> want to > >>>>>>> start, go ahead :) What I need is a concept of a page that is > shared > >>>>>>> with a > >>>>>>> group of users, but the users cannot edit the page, only the > >>>>>>> administrator > >>>>>>> of the page. See also [1] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please add to the proposal http://wiki.apache.org/rave/** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ArchitectureTopics/PageModel<h**ttp://wiki.apache.org/rave/** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ArchitectureTopics/PageModel< > http://wiki.apache.org/rave/ArchitectureTopics/PageModel> > >>>>>> I've got some changes&improvements I've made to the page sharing > >>>>> > >>>>> facility > >>>>> > >>>>> (RAVE-103), which probably are relevant to this discussion. > >>>>> (not team pages yet, but the ability to make shared pages > non-editable, > >>>>> for instance) > >>>>> Is it okay to commit this or are we too near the next build (i.e. is > >>>>> there > >>>>> a code freeze yet?) > >>>>> > >>>>> There's no code freeze yet, but if you break something now, you have > >>>> > >>>> less > >>>> than 24 hours to fix it ;) > >>>> Luckily some of the basic features are now covered by the integration > >>>> tests: > >>>> http://rave.apache.org/**integration-tests.html< > http://rave.apache.org/integration-tests.html> > >>>> > >>> Thanks Jasha, I've just comitted the changes. I'd be grateful if some > >>> of > >>> the other commiters could take a look. > >>> > >>> Paul > >>> > >>> > >> Good improvements! Without permission to edit the shared page users > don't > >> get the false hope to move or add widgets. I even tried to mess with the > >> widget store url and the referring page id, but then you still cannot > add > >> widgets :) > >> > >> In the share page dialog: > >> Shouldn't the "Edit preferences" option be disabled for users that don't > >> have edit permission? IMO it would be even better to remove the disabled > >> options than to show them greyed out. > > > > > > Just looking at the other menus, (the page menu for example) actions I > can't > > take as a user tend to be greyed out so I took the cue from that UI > pattern. > > (unless I have missed something :-) ) Its easy enough to change I guess. > > > > The reason I didn't grey out the "Edit preferences" was so that you can > > change something in your session, but it will not be persisted and so > will > > revert back to the perisisted state when you log in again. This is > similar > > to how the minimize/maximize widget now works for a non editing user. > This > > was an assumption and could be completely locked down instead. > > > > > >> The label "Edit permission" is a bit confusing (what permission can this > >> person edit?). Maybe "Permission to edit" or "Can edit page" are less > >> confusing. It is easy to change the add/remove links into checkboxes? > > > > > > Fair comment & easy enough to change > > > > My vote would be to disable all menus unless you are the owner/editor. > It doesn't make sense to allow someone with read-only access to > perform any actions on the page or the gadgets themselves. i.e. If I > have read-only access to the page I shouldn't be able to edit the > preferences or even maximize the gadget. >
The view of the gadget (home or canvas) is not stored and defaults to the home view. Not allowing to maximize the gadget may mean a loss of functionality. See for example the Google translate gadget which has more options in the canvas (maximized) view. > > > > >> > >> > >>>> Jasha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Paul > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/****5dfecb5gk7qynqdc< > http://markmail.org/thread/**5dfecb5gk7qynqdc> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> <http://**markmail.org/thread/**5dfecb5gk7qynqdc< > http://markmail.org/thread/5dfecb5gk7qynqdc> > >>>>>> Jasha > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ----- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No virus found in this message. > >>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > >>>>>> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5029 - Release Date: > >>>>>> 05/28/12 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> ----- > >>>> No virus found in this message. > >>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > >>>> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5029 - Release Date: > >>>> 05/28/12 > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> ----- > >> No virus found in this message. > >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > >> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5029 - Release Date: > 05/28/12 > > > > >
