Hi Sarthak, > On 6 Jun 2017, at 15:59, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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?
I’ll need your github user name to add you to the right group so that you have the permission. Thanks -Vincent > > 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] >>> >>> >>
