On 08/11/2010 02:46 PM, Anca Luca wrote: > Hi guys, > > Short story: > 1/ glorify macro categories and use them for more than presentational > purposes (e.g. using a category to differentiate "gadgets" macros from > other macros) > 2/ allow a macro to be part of multiple categories at the same time > > WDYT? > > Long story: > I have read http://markmail.org/thread/wwv56pojo6rix5zv about the > current implementation for macro categories and I noticed that the > discussion / approach there focuses on the presentational use of > categories for macros, how to display them grouped to the user. I would > say there's an important additional usecase, the usage of categories as > macros metadata, describing their semantic, to allow some apps to > implement different behaviour for macros in a category or another. For > example, in the case of gadgets / dashboard, if a gadget would be > implemented as a macro, then we'd need some sort of method to > differentiate the macros that can be used as gadgets. The most > 'semantic' way would be to use a gadgets category to mark the gadgets, > and the dashboard implementation will allow only macros from this > category to be added in the dashboard. However this approach would mean > that macro category gains importance, and we need to think if it's still > ok that an admin can change the category of a macro and the macro > category declared by the author can be completely overwritten. >
> WDYT about using the macro categories for much more than grouping for > presentation? -0, I think you're trying to use categories for something that they weren't designed for. Their purpose is to help users find macros based on macro functionality and not based on implementation/technical details. > > I'm +1, and I think that ftm there's no need to strategy change wrt to > who establishes the category of a macro. > > Also, because of this, it's very possible that we might need a macro to > be part of more than one category, because, to continue the example, we > might want gadgets to also be grouped in several categories (of > gadgets), or a gadget to also be included in the, say, "presentation" > category of macros to be used in plain xwiki documents. > > WDYT? -0, sounds like you want to transform categories in tags. I'm for keeping just one category per macro and adding other meta data (e.g. tags) if really needed. Thanks, Marius > > I am +1 for this as well, and ready to start building the patch (modulo > some macros API changes) as soon as we all agree. > > Thanks, > Anca > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
