On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:59 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > On 17 Sep 2015 at 14:51:32, Eduard Moraru ([email protected](mailto: > [email protected])) wrote: > > > IMO the "sibling", "parent", "child", "leaf" terminology is too > distracting > > since they are metaphors and, due to its real-world signification, some > > users might focus too much on that instead of simply focusing on the > > hierarchy aspect which is very simply communicated by the sub prefix. > > > > E.g. of a possible misinterpretation: > > A user wants to create a document under (sub) the structure of another > > document, he does not want to have his documents start giving "birth" to > > little baby (child) documents, and then those documents could have little > > baby brothers or sisters (siblings) and so on (descendants), thus > creating > > a "dynasty" of documents, instead of a structure/hierarchy. > > > > Yes, that sounds weird, but that`s how it would sound like, IMO, to an > > English native speaker. As an exercise, try translating that terminology > in > > another language (your native language preferably) and you will get a > > relatively similar result which is not really compatible IMO with > > "documents". > > > > The tree structure by itself is an extremely generic structure and could > > easily be mapped in certain implementations to these "dynasty" metaphors, > > however documents are pretty specific (not much room for interpretation > and > > they are not living things) so using the "dynasty" approach feels a bit > off. > > > > > > There is also the "child vs descendant" issue that I don`t think we want > to > > start dealing with (differentiating) in our UIs. > > > > Just my concern or maybe I am being too picky, but it probably comes down > > to what we want to choose to ignore, as long as it is our intentional > > choice to do that. > > The world is all about metaphors and that’s good and what we want since > that what makes something easy to memorize and understand. > > Look at those words: Space, Page, Document, Folder. They’re all metaphors. > > What’s important is to pick metaphors that people can understand. For > example we know that Folder could possibly have been a better metaphor than > Space. > > I find that Child/Children/Parent/Descendants/Siblings are perfect > metaphores because people know them and use them daily. > I obviously agree with this. > Subspace is not a well known metaphore. Nor is subpage. > Just for the record, some numbers: * Nested Space(s): 15,100 results https://www.google.com/search?q=google+wars&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#safe=off&q=%28%22nested+spaces%22+OR+%22nested+space%22%29 * Subspace(s): 830,000 results https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#safe=off&hl=en&q=%2B%28%22subspace%22+OR+%22subspaces%29 * define: subspace https://www.google.com/search?q=define&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#safe=off&q=define:+subspace * wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspace > IMO… > Technically I also side with the standard tree terminology, can`t really avoid that. I am just considering a non-technical view on it, as far as I can imagine it :) and trying to see if we can improve the presentation in any way. Thanks, Eduard > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Thanks, > > Eduard > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:10 PM, [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Sep 2015 at 13:32:28, Eduard Moraru ([email protected] > (mailto: > > > [email protected])) wrote: > > > > > > > With the introduction of Nested Spaces / Nested Documents, we find > > > > ourselves having to expand our terminology to accommodate the > tree-like > > > > structure of spaces/documents that we are managing. > > > > > > > > IMO, we have started going in the wrong direction with using standard > > > tree > > > > terminology directly in XWiki's UI, introducing new terms that simple > > > users > > > > could be easily confused by or overwhelmed (this adding to the > already > > > > existing ones). > > > > > > > > The specific issue I have in mind is how do we refer child entities > for > > > > each concept (wiki, space, page) and how does this scale when the > > > hierarchy > > > > increases. > > > > > > > > What I propose is that we Keep It SSimple (*™*) :) and just use the > "sub" > > > > prefix for the concept at hand. > > > > > > > > Examples: > > > > * wiki -> subwiki (here we can continue using "wiki", as discussed > > > > previously [1], since we don`t actually support nested wikis yet, > but if > > > > "subwiki" is used in a conversation it still makes perfect sense) > > > > * space -> subspace [2] > > > > * page -> subpage [3] > > > > > > > > The problem with the term "child", as pointed out by Marius in an > offline > > > > chat, has indeed the issue that it can only be applied correctly for > > > first > > > > level descendants, after which it becomes inaccurate, since starting > with > > > > the second level the term "descendant" is more appropriate. > > > > > > I’m not sure about this. I think Children could be used generically to > > > mean any level of Children but would need to be checked. > > > > > > > > All of this becomes unnecessarily complicated and, IMO, we should > avoid > > > > dealing with it by using the "sub" prefix which is much easier to > grasp > > > and > > > > accept. > > > > > > > > On a similar note, I also find the term "nested" to be a bit > > > unnecessarily > > > > complicated, specially for non-technical and non-english native > users. > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > I don’t like the “Sub" terminology because it’s incomplete. It’s not > > > complete because you still need words for Parents, Siblings, Root, etc. > > > > > > I'd much prefer to use a standard Tree terminology: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure)#Terminologies_used_in_Trees > > > > > > BTW Terminal Page could be replaced by Leaf Page if we wanted too but > > > maybe that’s too technical? > > > > > > I’d be ok to replace subwiki by Child Wiki/Children Wikis to be > consistent. > > > > > > So overall I find Child/Children, Parent, and Siblings very easy to > > > understand by any simple user. I find that using Sub, Parent, Siblings > is > > > not better (and it would certainly not replace Sibling). > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > Thanks > > > -Vincent > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Eduard > > > > > > > > ---------- > > > > [1] http://markmail.org/message/cehvpds5qmljq5f7 > > > > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspace > > > > [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpage > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
