I think I remember discussing multiple categories when we did this and I was in 
favor of them. I'm not sure why we didn't do it.

I agree that a macro can fit in several categories.

Thanks
-Vincent

On Aug 11, 2010, at 1:46 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?
> 
> 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?
> 
> 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

Reply via email to