Hello Vincent, Created the first issue on Jira: https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/GLOSSARY-1 How will I access the repo on xwiki-contrib? Whether some request is required on my part?
Thanks Sarthak Gupta On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > This is crystal clear to me. > Yes, I am totally ok with it. :) > > Thanks > Sarthak Gupta > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > On 6 Jun 2017, at 08:26, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hello Vincent, >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Sarthak, >> >> >> >>> On 29 May 2017, at 19:02, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Vincent, >> >>> As the coding period begins tomorrow officially, so I will need a >> repo in >> >>> xwiki-contrib. :) >> >> >> >> Done: >> >> - Github: https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/application-glossary >> >> - JIRA: https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/GLOSSARY >> >> >> >> You should create a single issue for the 1st version of the glossary >> app >> >> and describe in the jira what this first version will contain & assign >> it >> >> to you. Then when you commit make sure to use the format as described >> on >> >> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPra >> >> ctices#HJIRABestPractices >> >> >> >>> Also, will my general workflow be like: >> >>> >> >>> - making changes inside XWiki(xwiki instance). >> >>> - Exporting those changes. (XML files will be generated) >> >> >> >> Make sure to use “mvn xar:format” too. See “xwiki xar plugin” in >> google. >> >> >> >>> - Adding those files to GitHub Repo. >> >>> - Doing regular commits to Github repo. >> >> >> >> Sounds good! >> >> >> >>> Secondly, I had a doubt that, if I want to customize a page using >> >>> CSS/Javascript. What is the correct way of doing that? >> >> >> >>> I mean, whether I create objects(jsx/jsfx and ssx) on the same page as >> >>> Glossary app home page(if I want to add styles to Glossary home page) >> or >> >>> make separate pages for them. I saw the blog app and there it is >> created >> >>> separately. >> >> >> >> What’s important is that technical content is created in the Code >> subspace. >> >> >> >>> Also, I wanted to enquire if there is some naming convention while >> >> creating >> >>> different pages, or I should name them suitably.(Yes, those names can >> be >> >>> changed later :P). >> >> >> >> There are some best practices here: >> >> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDev >> >> elopmentBestPractices >> >> >> >>> * Have a “Add Glossary Entry” button and text field to add a new >> entry. >> >>> >> >>> IMO, "Add Glossary Entry" button will vanish the 'context' thing >> >>> because glossary will for the items/words on different pages of XWiki. >> >> How >> >>> can a user enter a glossary entry if he doesn't know the source? :) >> (Just >> >>> like annotations). >> >> >> >> This question is worrying me because it probably means we have a >> >> completely different idea of the glossary application! >> >> >> >> For me glossary means linking a glossary term with a glossary >> definition. >> >> >> >> As you can see there’s no context need for doing that obviously… >> >> >> >> Why do you say there *must* be a context like annotation? >> >> >> >> This is actually even wrong IMO because a *ANY* page having the >> glossary >> >> item should render it with a link to the glossary definition... >> >> >> > Can you explain your reasoning because it’s important you understand the >> >> work to be done. >> > >> > >> > I was in the thought that a glossary item may have different meanings >> in >> > different contexts. For eg: In some page a term(say 'foo') may mean one >> > thing and in an another page the term may mean something else. >> > So, I thought that if a user is adding things in context then it will >> not >> > create that scenario. >> > >> > But, now I think that this idea will not be feasible and will not be >> > user-friendly also. And I was using the term 'annotation' in a wrong >> sense >> > (sorry for that). >> > >> > The solution to the above problem can be that we should allow user to >> > create multiple glossary entries for a single glossary item just like >> in a >> > dictionary. And also it will be a very rare case that there will be >> > glossary item with multiple meanings, so we can also drop this idea. >> > WDYT? >> >> I think this is not a real problem. A glossary is not like a dictionary >> IMO. People are going to use a glossary to define the meaning of some very >> specific words/acronyms/etc that are related to their domains/business >> (e.g. “open source”, “wiki”, etc) and I don’t think there’s the issue of >> having various definitions. Now that said, having several definitions would >> be fine provided we don’t link a specific definition to a page. IMO we >> should keep it simple and keep glossary items independent of the page for >> simplicity. So IMO a single text area is enough for the moment. >> >> Ok with you? >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >> >> > >> > >> >> Let me say it differently: A glossary item is not linking a >> description to >> >> one or several words located in a page! It’s linking a description to >> some >> >> words. Period. Then *any* page having those words should link to the >> >> description. >> >> >> >> >> > This is good. >> > >> > >> > >> >> Do you agree? >> > >> > >> > Yes, this is absolutely clear to me and I totally agree. :) >> > >> > >> >>> So, I think, it shouldn't be there. WDYT? >> >>> >> >>> Little Guidance required. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks :) >> >>> >> >>> Sarthak >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> -Vincent >> >> >> > >> > Thanks >> > Sarthak Gupta >> > >> >> >> >>> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hi Sarthak, >> >>>> >> >>>>> On 26 May 2017, at 16:36, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Hi everyone, >> >>>>> I would be working on the proposal 'Glossary Application' in the >> coming >> >>>>> days. The details of the proposal can be found on the Design Page >> >>>>> <http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/GlossaryApp >> lication> >> >> . >> >>>>> Please tell me if something is not clear. Any suggestions are >> welcomed. >> >>>> :) >> >>>> >> >>>> Sorry for responding late, I was on holidays a good part of last >> week :) >> >>>> >> >>>>> I wanted to propose a UI for both the pages ('HomePage' and >> 'glossary >> >>>> page >> >>>>> for each item'). >> >>>>> >> >>>>> - For the Glossary HomePage: >> >>>>> - A search bar will be employed on the top of page, which would >> search >> >>>> a >> >>>>> glossary page(from glossary space) if a user enters the matching >> >>>>> words for >> >>>>> that glossary items. A search bar will be made using HTML/CSS. >> >>>> >> >>>> IMO you should check the way it’s done by the FAQ application. >> >>>> >> >>>>> - The search results (suggestions) will be displayed on the same >> >>>> page >> >>>>> below the search bar along with the location of the glossary >> >>>>> item.(considering the fact that two glossary items with the same >> >>>> name may >> >>>>> exist). I saw that there is a 'Suggest Widget' for this. Hope I >> >>>>> can make it >> >>>>> work :P . >> >>>> >> >>>> I don’t think that’s the best. Check the FAQ app and how it does it. >> >>>> >> >>>> What would make more sense to me if a UI similar to the FAQ one: >> >>>> * Display all glossary entries in a LT >> >>>> * Have a search form to search for entries >> >>>> >> >>>> * Have a “Add Glossary Entry” button and text field to add a new >> entry >> >>>> >> >>>> See http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/FAQ%20A >> >> pplication >> >>>> >> >>>>> - On clicking those links, the user will be directed to the >> >> matching >> >>>>> glossary page. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Is this UI ok? >> >>>> >> >>>> See above >> >>>> >> >>>>> - Glossary Page of each glossary item: >> >>>>> - It will contain two fields. >> >>>>> - First field will be a 'String' which will contain the name of >> the >> >>>>> glossary item. >> >>>> >> >>>> I don’t think that’s needed since the page name can be used as the >> >>>> glossary item name. >> >>>> >> >>>>> - Second field will be a 'text area' named "Glossary". It will >> >>>>> contain the glossary of that item that a user will enter itself >> on >> >>>> the >> >>>>> page, he is on. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Is this UI ok? >> >>>> >> >>>> Actually, the need is exactly the same as for the FAQ app so it’ll be >> >> very >> >>>> simple to copy. At least initially since we may need to add other >> >>>> properties for glossary items. >> >>>> >> >>>> The bug difference will come for the rendering side and the UI to >> >> navigate >> >>>> or add a glossary item when viewing an existing page. >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> After this I will update my design page and tell you about my next >> >>>>> steps.....! >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks >> >>>> -Vincent >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks :) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Sarthak Gupta >> >>>>> [sarthakg] >> >> >
