On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 11:20 AM Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 5:34 PM Adel Atallah <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > So what we thought about with Vincent for implementing the "concept of > > aliases or groups" would be to actually have two new annotations that > > we would use on macro properties. > > The first one is a "Group" annotation which is meant to indicate that > > some properties are part of the same group, obviously. > > The second is an "Alternative" annotation which is meant to indicate > > that only one property / group of properties can be used (among the > > ones that are part of the alternative). > > Here is an example: > > We want for the Include macro to be able to specify either: > > the "reference" and "type" parameters > > or > > the "page" parameter > > For that, we will change the IncludeMacroParameters java class like this: > > > > @Alternative("reference") > > @Group("entityReference") > > public void setReference(String reference) > > > > @Alternative("reference") > > @Group("entityReference") > > public void setType(EntityType type) > > > > @Alternative("reference") > > public void setPage(String page) > > > > In the WYSIWYG side, we will only be able to specify either the > > "reference" and the "type" or the "page" parameter. > > > > I think it would make more sense, at least in this case, to have the > alternative as an attribute of the group, because semantically the > "entityReference" group is an alternative to the page parameter. You can't > say that the type parameter alone is an alternative to the page parameter. > > The @Group annotation is clear. No doubt about it. I'm not sure about > the @Alternative annotation. I'm thinking that the "alternative" is also a > group, where only one item from the group can be used, which could be > expressed with an attribute of the @Group annotation.
Thanks for the suggestion, but how can it be used? If I retake my previous example, will it be: @Group(name = "entityReference", alternative = "reference") public void setReference(String reference) @Group(name = "entityReference", alternative = "reference") public void setType(EntityType type) @Group(name = "page", alternative = "reference") public void setPage(String page) ? > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > Thanks, > > Adel > > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:51 AM Marius Dumitru Florea > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:31 PM Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 19 Sep 2018, at 14:47, Adel Atallah <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 5:00 PM Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>> On 5 Jul 2018, at 12:06, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> On 4 Jul 2018, at 12:07, Thomas Mortagne < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Here are more details on the actual use case we need to support: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> In include/Display macro either you set: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> * "reference" and "type" (which default to DOCUMENT) > > > > >>>> * or you set “page" > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Globally I think we need to add 3 concepts to macro parameter > > > > descriptor: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 1) The concept of “deprecated” parameter. For example for > > “document” > > > > in the include macro. > > > > >>> 2) The concept of aliases or groups, i.e the ability to list > > > > parameters that are mutually exclusive. Example: reference + type vs > > page > > > > for display/include macros. This would mean that in the Macro Dialog > > UI if > > > > you select one of those the other gets unselected/cleared out (you > > cannot > > > > have mutually exclusive params have values). > > > > >>> 3) The concept of Advanced parameters. For example, we should put > > > > reference + type as advanced parameters so that they are not shown to > > the > > > > user by default (and so that the page parameter is more highlighted). > > Users > > > > would need to click on Advanced to see advanced parameters. I think > > we’re > > > > doing something automatic today (I don’t remember the details) to try > > to > > > > hide some parameters but we should probably review this. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> WDYT? > > > > >> > > > > >> Ping! > > > > >> > > > > >> Do we agree about this? If we do we can then create jira issue > > about it > > > > and take it for implementation. > > > > > > > > > > +1, I can create the jira issue if it's ok. > > > > > > > > Please do :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Marius: Ok for you? > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > -Vincent > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
