Yup! :) Thanks
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 6 Jun 2017, at 16:10, Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > My github user-name is sarthak-sopho > > https://github.com/sarthak-sopho > > Done, you should have received an invitation. > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > 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] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
