Hello, +1 for typing spaces.
Raluca. On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 13:21, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > > > See below > > > > On Aug 3, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Denis Gervalle wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:39, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Denis, > > >> > > >> On Aug 3, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Vincent, > > >>> > > >>> Why are you proposing 2 booleans ? Is there non-technical application > > >> spaces > > >>> ? > > >> > > >> Here's an example: The Scheduler space: > > >> - it's a technical space (i.e. not shown to all users) > > >> - it's an application space (i.e. shown in the Application Panel for > > >> advanced users) > > >> > > >> A second example: The Blog space: > > >> - it's a non technical space (i.e. shown to all users) > > >> - it's an application space (i.e. shown to all in the Application > Panel) > > > > > > > > >> Another example: The Sandbox space: > > >> - it's a non technical space (i.e. shown to all users) > > >> - it's not an application space (i.e. not shown in the Application > Panel > > >> but shown in the Spaces list in the Dashboard - i.e. in the "Content" > > spaces > > >> list) > > >> > > >>> Maybe a static list for qualifying spaces would be better and more > > >> flexible, > > >>> WDYT ? > > >>> Or else, why not having a boolean for really hiding spaces, the true > > >>> replacement of blacklistedspaces (there could be non-technical spaces > > >> that > > >>> admin want to hide anyway) and maybe a static list for qualifying > them > > if > > >>> you have identified this need? > > >> > > >> To do that you'd need two lists for hiding spaces: one for simple > users > > and > > >> one for advanced users. That's because both categories of users don't > > >> necessarily match in term of needs. > > >> > > >> I'm fine to have 3 booleans for each space if you think we need to > have > > >> this use case (i.e. ability to not show spaces for advanced users - > I'm > > >> still unsure we want to do this though): > > >> - is an application space? > > >> - is hidden for simple users (replacing technical space idea)? > > >> - is hidden for advanced users? > > >> > > > > > > This is going worse IMHO. Finally we needs filtering spaces based on > > users > > > and "types" of space. Reading this, I am more in favor of "typing" > spaces > > (a > > > single extensible static list), and compute the blacklistedspaces list > > based > > > on these "types", as well as any other list of spaces you may imagine, > > like > > > the list of application spaces. For the blacklistedspaces, computing > the > > > list in velocity is finally not so bad, and could be adapted depending > on > > > your use cases. "Typing" spaces would only helps doing it better. > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > If I understand correctly you're in agreement with all that I've proposed > > in my initial email except for the implementation part for which you're > > suggesting to use a single "types" property that would hold all possible > > space types (rather than having several boolean fields). Something > similar > > to tags basically. > > > > I'm very fine with this. I even like it since it's a generalization. > > > > It means though that we need to have some "well-known types" on which we > > can depend. Based on the use cases defined so far we would have 3 > possible > > values: > > - "technical": only visible for advanced users > > - "application": listed in the Application Panel (and excluded from the > > Spaces list in the dashboard) > > - "hidden": not displayed to anyone including advanced users (we'd need > to > > define more clearly in which screens they'd be hidden and in which others > > they'd be visible to advanced users though) > > > > I'm proposing to start with "technical" and "application" for now. > > > > WDYT? > > > > You get it Vincent, and sorry if my reply have been unclear. > For the list, it should stay open, and just fullfil your current needs. I > am > not sure hidden is a correct typing however, so I would start with 3 > "default" (or whatever you like), "technical" and "application". > Do not forget in your thought that it would also be nice to filter search > results based on these as well. > I am +1 for that implementation or something similar and open that do not > link filtering and "typing" of spaces. > > Denis > > > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > >> What do others think? Do we need the ability to hide spaces for > advanced > > >> users? > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> -Vincent > > >> > > >>> Your idea seams to me interesting but will probably fall short or be > > >> misused > > >>> on the long term... > > >>> > > >>> Denis > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 19:05, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi devs, > > >>>> > > >>>> I'd like to propose 2 small changes that should make a huge > difference > > >> for > > >>>> our users. > > >>>> > > >>>> 1) Introduce the notion of technical spaces > > >>>> > > >>>> The idea is that in WebPreferences for a space we should have a > > boolean > > >>>> property mentioning if the space is a technical space or not. > > >>>> This will allow to: > > >>>> * Remove the blacklistedspaces variable > > >>>> * List only non technical spaces for simple users > > >>>> > > >>>> 2) Introduce the notion of Application spaces > > >>>> > > >>>> The idea is that in WebPreferences for a space we should have a > > boolean > > >>>> property mentioning if the space is an application space or not. > > >>>> This will allow to: > > >>>> * Replace the Quick Links Panel with an Applications Panel listing > all > > >>>> spaces that are application spaces > > >>>> * Only list Content spaces in the Spaces Gadget in the Dashboard > > >>>> * Add the ability for extensions to declare new applications that > > >>>> automatically appear in the Applications Panel > > >>>> > > >>>> I'd also like to suggest adding a global admin preferences to > quickly > > >>>> select all spaces that are application and/or technical spaces > > (imagine > > >> a > > >>>> list of all spaces with 2 checkboxes for each space listed). This > > makes > > >> it > > >>>> very easy for the admin to reconfigure what are application spaces > > (thus > > >>>> showing in the app panel) and what spaces should be hidden for > simple > > >> users. > > >>>> Of course modifying these would modify the WebPreferences of the > said > > >>>> spaces. > > >>>> > > >>>> In addition to make this autodiscoverable I'd suggest that for > admins > > >> the > > >>>> Application Panel should have a link to this admin feature. > Something > > >> like > > >>>> "Configure Applications...". > > >>>> > > >>>> WDYT? > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks > > >>>> -Vincent > > >>>> > > >>>> PS: I'm very excited about these 2 ideas since they're simple and > IMO > > >> will > > >>>> make XE much easier to use and understand for people starting to use > > it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > > > > > -- > Denis Gervalle > SOFTEC sa - CEO > eGuilde sarl - CTO > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
