On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 01:53, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Caty, > > I am glad to see that others are looking at what we do, and it is good time > for them to comment now, since I will not have many more comments now :) I > have replied to some of your comment below... > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 18:54, Ecaterina Valica <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Take a look at Rights 5 > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights5Space > > > > Added: > > * information regarding the advanced rights (inherits, overrides) > > * icons built together as a whole > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/icons.png > > * representation of "advanced rights" with the same abstract icon, but > with > > different color (no text; we can debate this) > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/color.png > > * inheritance arrow married with +/- > > > > IMGs (in case of browser problem) > > - collapsed: > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/rights5Space.png > > - expanded: > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights5Space/rights5SpaceExpanded.png > > > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:42, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Caty, > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 18:09, Ecaterina Valica <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > > > I want to thank you again for all the help you are giving :P > > > > > > > > > > This is pleasure to participate especially because you provide really > > good > > > proposals. > > > I would also like to see others participating, currently the discussion > > is > > > becoming to much bilateral IMO. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please take a look at a proposal for "V3 and my 3)" version with > > elements > > > > from Rights2 :) > > > > > > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal > > > > and in "action" > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Space > > > > > > > > > Really nice job ! I really appreciate. > > > > > > > > > > The prototype is not reflecting the "desired" interaction: both > > inherited > > > > info and rights change appear on hover (right icon and arrow), > instead > > of > > > > hover | click. > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure what are really your intend. I think that the big > tooltips > > > describing the rights should be the only tooltips, and should be show > on > > > hover only after a small timeout (like the yellow one currently). > > Clicking > > > any where on the +/- icon or v would then open the menu. > > > Is it what you try ? > > > > > > > > yes, on hover show the tooltip, on click show the menu. > > > This is perfect, but you should include a little timeout for the tooltips, > or it will be too much invasive. > From the reaction of Alex and Raluca, I really hope you will be able to > implement the correct interaction in your samples, since this seems to > cause > a lot of confusion. If you can't, let me know, I will try to find some time > to have a look at it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That "v" needs to be an arrow like the one we use in the action > menus. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 19:06, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Caty, > > > > > > > > > > Really nice and interesting post, I will try to reach that level... > > but > > > > > without visual :\ > > > > > > > > > > I really think that using the collapsed view for editing would > helps > > > > basic > > > > > users to have a simplified and more easy interface to understand. > We > > > may > > > > > even imagine that only "advanced user" (those marked so in their > > > > profile), > > > > > has access to the expanded view. > > > > > > > > > > I think that the collapsed view missed an additional icon that > > > summarize > > > > > the > > > > > rights that are not shown. This one would only be shown if there is > > any > > > > > non-defaulted additional right in action. > > > > > > > > This is a signal that extended > > > > > rights are in use (See it like the grey box of Windows when special > > > > rights > > > > > are setup, which is inviting to go into advanced view to know > more). > > > This > > > > > one would be obviously not editable, and should probably work like > > the > > > > ... > > > > > or replace it ? In place of the ... . Concerning the ..., I am not > > > sure, > > > > > but > > > > > I would also prefer to see a textual link "advanced" in small font, > > and > > > > > only > > > > > visible when row is hovered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal#HRowhover > > > > > > > > > Sorry to insist, but the information regarding the advanced rights is > > still > > > missing in collapsed mode. > > > I really would like to have a indicator that some advanced rights has > > been > > > set locally or not without having to go advanced mode. Else, you will > > have > > > to expand all rows to check that information, which is not practical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Order of right are not significant, so I would prefer that in all > > view, > > > > > these where in the same order, with the basic right first > > (V/C/E/D/A/P) > > > > and > > > > > the additional right in their order of registration (hope that it > > will > > > > stay > > > > > constant... or we will have to find a way to keep them ordered). > > > > > The "right" part of each icon should be grayed if the right is > > > inherited > > > > > and > > > > > not grayed if the right is set locally, this improve the > information > > > > > provided in V3. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights43Proposal#HAfterclick > > > > > > > > The problem with this icons (taken from Silk) is that there is little > > > > difference for View, Comment, Admin icons between the two states > > > > (inherited, > > > > locally set) - but this is something we can easily improve (by > changing > > > the > > > > icons and looking for some more contrast). > > > > Example: This is how they look when all rights are set locally (full > > > color) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Improvements/Rights43Proposal/fullColors.png > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I also think that the +/- (which is never grayed) could be > > > > > nearer to the right icon. Maybe you could use a green V and a read > > > "stop" > > > > > in > > > > > place of +/- ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The other mockup versions (like > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights41Space > > ) > > > > used > > > > v/x for the allow/deny representation, and yes, I agree that they are > > > more > > > > suited than +/-. > > > > > > > > The problem is that we are using in XWiki, X to represent delete, so > > > having > > > > two xX was too much, that's why I introduced +/-. Maybe we can find > > > another > > > > solution. > > > > > > > > > > I think we need some polishing on the icons used. Building them > > > specifically > > > would be nice, but I do not know if you or anyone want to have a try at > > > that. My feeling is that the couple +/- or better v/x and the right > icon > > > should be built together and closer to each other providing the > > information > > > as a whole and not giving the impression of two part. Using a v for > > > suggesting the menu is nice, could be even improved by styling some > > "button > > > like" borders on hover. > > > > > > All menus could also be improved by using the inheritance arrow married > > > with > > > +/- (or v/x) to show immediately what will be the right if inheritance > is > > > used. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the collapsed view, I see three possibilities to > > investigate > > > > for > > > > > allowing edition while improving readability (note that readability > > has > > > > the > > > > > same issue in expanded view, but it seems to be less annoying) : > > > > > > > > > > 1) use V3, but when hovering a row, use V2 on that row and allow > > > > drag/drop > > > > > (keeping V2 until drop even is hover is temporary lost). Not sure > > this > > > > will > > > > > be nice in practice ? see 2) > > > > > > > > > > 2) use a presentation in 4 columns, for both collapsed and expanded > > > view, > > > > > the first column behing a read-only summary like V3, and the 3 > column > > > > being > > > > > an ordered V1. However, dragging from summary would be allowed. The > 3 > > > > > detailed column could be shown only when a drag is started from > > > summary, > > > > or > > > > > with a global horizontal expansion button... Basic user would have > > > access > > > > > to > > > > > this, but not necessarily to vertical row expansion. Not sure this > is > > > not > > > > > an > > > > > increase in complexity ? so, see 3) > > > > > > > > > > 3) use V3, and a similar interface to what we have in current right > > > > > management interface. Since saved are postponed (not like we have > > > > > currently), using this one may be both practical and could helps > the > > > > > transition for existing user as well. With all the belts and > whistle > > > > added > > > > > to clearly state changes and inheritance, this will be similar but > > > really > > > > > better than what we have. > > > > > > > > > > If we go for V3 and my 3) proposal, I also wonder if the current > > table > > > > > header is well done. I do not like it when nothing is expanded > since > > it > > > > is > > > > > confusing, too large, and not significant. It will be even more > > > > unexpected > > > > > if you follow me on the "advance user" case, when a basic user look > > at > > > > it. > > > > > Maybe you could try a changing header, only expanding when there is > > > > > expanded > > > > > row, or, you could move the expanded header in each expanded row, > > > keeping > > > > a > > > > > simplified header at the top. > > > > > > > > > > WDYT ? > > > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Other problem that this proposal has is the representation of > "advanced > > > > rights". If we don't like the textual description and we want to add > > > icons, > > > > IMO we have two solutions: > > > > > > > > A) use the same abstract icon, but with different color, ex. a key or > > > lock > > > > icon with color representation ("blue" for "programming", "green" for > > > > "captchaComment", etc) > > > > - the problem here is for the people that have some kind color > > blindness > > > > and > > > > will not distinguish between some color tones (this is the case when > we > > > > gonna have lots of "advanced" | non default rights) > > > > > > > > B) use the same abstract icon and with an order index (like numbers > 1, > > 2, > > > > etc or characters A, B, etc) > > > > > > > > These representations are based on the fact that "advanced rights" > will > > > be > > > > added by other developers and the icon will not be custom made for a > > > specif > > > > right. > > > > > > > > > > Why not just use the big Icons from the menu (using the inheritance > arrow > > > married with +/- as proposed above), and directly followed by the v > > arrow. > > > All this in front of the text ? > > > > > > > inheritance arrow + "right" - to describe "right" as inherited allowed > > inheritance arrow - "right" - to describe "right" as inherited denied > > + "right" - to describe "right" allowed > > - "right" - to describe "right" denied > > > > yes - we could do that if we decide to use the textual variant. > > > > Personally I would prefer the text variant. If not, I do not see the point > to expand vertically, just put all on a single row. > > The reason they are put on two rows is the one you gave me: "helps basic users to have a simplified and more easy interface to understand. We may even imagine that only 'advanced user' (those marked so in their profile), has access to the expanded view. "
If we are gonna add rights per application, then we will have a separation between the "basic rights" and the "extended/advanced rights". The "basic rights" are the ones that any admin should know about and that cover the most important functions of the wiki. "Extended rights" could be easy ignored by admins (especially beginners admins), that can rely on their default status. If we put all the rights on the same row, we are giving them the same importance and the admins will feel the need to learn and set them all. IMO, programming will fit in the "extended rights" section. Also, if we are using icons, I prefer all rights should be represented with icons because of the consistency. There is no need to have two representations for elements that do the same thing (if all are rights than they should all act like it, look like it, etc) > > > > > > > > > Using a generic icon will not improve information and detailed view of > > > advanced right in collapsed mode is not expected. > > > > > > It is not clearly shown on your samples, how multiple advance right > would > > > be > > > shown. I think one per row is nice, or if you want to limit space, 2 or > 3 > > > at > > > most, shown in columns ? > > > > > > > this depends on which version (textual, icons) we choose for the advanced > > rights (I would prefer something linear) > > > > I do not agree, I see basic as an horizontal presentation and advance to be > a vertical more detailed variant. Maybe the inheritance information from > the > tootips could be put in a second column when displaying advanced mode. > With what information the right represented in the collapsed mode will be more detailed than in the expanded one? By having the name written explicit in text? This is not enough and when you have icons that are use elsewhere in the wiki, the user learns the meaning and doesn't need the textual info so bad. What you are telling me is like the version 4.2, when the collapse mode was just a summary of the expanded mode. But when we moved in the collapse mode the functionality (changing the right/drag), then the collapsed mode began to represent the interface and not the summary any more. That's why I removed the duplicates from the expanded mode. There is no use to put the same actions/info twice. This only will overload the interface and will bring few/to none improvements. > > > > > > > > > I also wonder is this would help or not to also extends basic rights in > > > advanced mode, showing the icons and the text ? > > > > > > I think this would only add duplicates and mess a bit the meaning of > > "advanced" by combining them with "regular". > > > > No, I would just remove the basic view in favor of a advance one, so there > is no duplication, just a more detailed view of the same information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another thing we need to consider for this proposal is how the > > filtering > > > is > > > > gonna be made. > > > > > > > > > > Good point. Here is some proposal for each column: > > > > > > 1) a dropdown list proposing local (default), global or both ? > > > > > > > I would prefer rights separation depending on the location: > > - if you want to see global rights - go to global; > > - if you want to see wiki rights - go to wiki, > > etc. > > > > > http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Rights3Proposal#HNavigation > > > > Why would you like to see both local and global? (filtering?) I think it > > will be easier for the user if they are separated. > > > > This is not global in term of right, it is about showing local user/group > or > global user/group. In a farm, the user xwiki:XWiki.Admin may receive > special > right on mywiki:MySpace.MyPage. So, the filtering would be to filter which > user are shown. This is exactly what the current interface do. Hiding > global > user by default is done so because knowing about global user is an advanced > usage that basic users ignore. > So, once again, this has nothing to do with the inheritance of rigths, but > about the origin of the user. And the first column is about user/group, so > it coud fit that need. > > k. Thanks for explaining that. It will be added to the display of filters. > > > > > 2) a textbox which filter on names > > > > > > > For advanced users would be nice to have queries, like "allow view" AND > > "inherit deny delete" :) > > > > I was filtering on user/group name here, since second columns is about > user/group names and does not relate to rights. > > > > > > > > > 3) a dropdown list proposing all (default), hide inherited only, and > > maybe > > > the list of rights, showing only rows where the selected right is set > > > locally ? > > > > > > > > The dropdown with the list of rights (view, edit, etc.) could also have > > another dropdown next to it to set the state of the right (inherited, > > allowed, denied) > > > > Why not, this should be tried to see what it provide. I am not sure this > will be used often, since rights regarding a given level are usually not so > complex that you are unable to read them all. I have seen interesting to > hide inherited only rows, because these are not show currently in the > interface, and this could be useful to revert to current view, especially > for user that has already used this interface. > I'll do a filter representation to see how is gonna look like. > > I hope this is clearer. I really hope that we will now receive more > feedback... and that we will be able to implement this in the near future > on > top of the new implementation of the right service from Andreas. > > Anyway,congratulation for this great piece of work. > Thanks Denis again for all the input, Caty > > Denis > > > > > > Thanks, > > Caty > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > > > -- > Denis Gervalle > SOFTEC sa - CEO > eGuilde sarl - CTO > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
