Hi Vincent, My github user-name is sarthak-sopho https://github.com/sarthak-sopho
Thanks Sarthak Gupta On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > 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] > >>> > >>> > >> > >
