On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> Some time back we started improving title handling, I'd like that we
>> continue this and I'm proposing some further improvements below:
>>
>> * Make the title field contain wiki syntax (same as the content field)
>> instead of just velocity
>
> I'm generally +1 for wiki content everywhere possible. Note that this
> is not going to be a smooth migration since a lot of titles contains
> velocity in XE for example and in most application in general.
>
>> * Make the title field a textarea so that we can have more than 1 line
>> * Display a textarea of 1 line initially (to preserve space) but enlarge the
>> textarea visibility by several line on the first Enter keypress in the field
>
> Would be nice to support that for object fields too.
>
>> * Stop trying to extract title content from the doc content
>
> Big +1 as I always been. But not sure it's the same subject. We can do
> that whatever is the decision for the rest especially since we already
> voted it once...
>
>> * Have a backward compat param to still support the old mode, but have it
>> off by default in 4.2/4.3
>
> If by old mode you mean velocity only content we can't exactly talk
> about compat param. It's going to be more a switch since you can't
> really have both old velocity based content and generic wiki content
> at the same time. That makes this parameter pretty much unsuable IMO
> (either you break all old stuff or all new stuff).
>
> Another idea (which is probably worst given all the APIs change that
> could produce but worth mentioning) could be to add a new field
> (something like "titleContent") which would be wiki based and
> deprecated "title" field which keep working the same way. When the
> compatibility parameter is enabled, fallback on "title" when
> "titleContent" is empty. We could enable it by default in 4.2 and
> disable it in 4.3. At least this system makes easier to have both
> modes working together.
>
>> <side>
>> * Introduce a {{i18n}} macro (or {{translate}}, or …)
>> </side>
>
> Not critical but yes we are using $msg.get a lot in our applications
> titles at least so would be nice to have a pure wiki replacement since
> it's a bit more painful to have to write
> {{velocty}}$msg.get('toto'){{/velocty}} in title than page content.
>
>>
>> Advantages:
>> * Same as the content field - More consistency
>> * More power since we use wiki syntax and we can use any script language
>> * Removes the WTF symptom when a user edits a page having velocity script in
>> the title since they'll see it displayed in WYSIWYG mode with the title
>> content evaluated
>> * Removes the uncertainty about title extraction (for ex if some macro
>> generates headings) but still allow it if it's really needed - Since the
>> user will be able to write scripts in the title textarea and those scripts
>> can extract stuff from the doc content if they really need it
>> * We'll be able to add a l18n macro and thus display the title translations
>> nicely in the wysiwyg editor
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> +1 to do this change when possible but I don't have much idea to make
Was "I don't have much idea to make the migration easier" but forgot
to remove it after the titeContent suggestion.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devs mailing list
>> devs@xwiki.org
>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs@xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
