On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > On 18 Mar 2016, at 14:58, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>> On 18 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < > [email protected] > > > > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> To be honest I think we should not have too many menu entries, or we > > >> might > > >>> need to find a way to split it again (just like we did with copy, > > delete, > > >>> etc.) > > >>> That's why I am not very fond of creating the 'Included Pages' and > the > > >>> 'Backlinks' viewers. I don't find them that useful and they are > somehow > > >>> technical. We removed Children from Information in order to replace > > Space > > >>> Index and also because we have the Children / Sibling mix. > > >> > > >> The issue is that once you say that the menu displays “information > about > > >> the page” it’s not very logical to have an entry named “Information” > any > > >> more (since there are others information entries). It could be named > > “More > > >> Information” or “Extra Information" but not “Information”. > > >> > > > > > > As mentioned on our previous chat, I see the 2nd section of More > Actions > > as > > > a "viewers" section. It`s probably inspired also by the way they are > > > implemented (/view/Page?viewer=<name>) > > > > Saying “viewer” (which is a technical term that I believe doesn’t mean > > anything to users) or saying it contains “Information about the page” is > > the same thing. Saying “viewer” just hides the semantic meaning. > > > > > Another way of looking at it would be to see the page as an object, > where > > > the 2nd section of "More Actions" would be the "getter" methods. > > > > That’s even more technical. Remember that we’re talking users here ;) > > > > I was not referring to simple users here, just trying to present it to you > :) > > > > > > > Remember this proposal > > > > > > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/NestedMenuReorganization#H1.1:Viewerssubmenu > > > > ...and this was a reminder on how it would look like if we would separate > these viewers, since it`s not the first time we`ve had this idea, hinting > that it`s a conclusion that is easy to reach, probably for simple users > too. > > > > > ? :) > > > > > > Looking at it this way, allows "Information" to stay where it is, IMO, > as > > > I`m also not a big fan of promoting the backlinks and included pages in > > the > > > menus. Also, remember that included pages is displayed in edit mode, in > > the > > > panel, which is, IMO, a better suited location anyway. > > > > This is just hiding the fact that the links all contain information about > > the current page. You can call it metadata, viewers or whatever you want > > it’s still about data (i.e. information) of the current page. And since > all > > other viewer links are also about this there’s no reason to have one > called > > with the generic name. > > > > Basically what “information” means here is “all the other metadata for > the > > page”. > > > > But it’s not a big issue. We don’t need to be 100% logical in the UI. > > > > Sure. Even so, I still find it relevant enough to have this ("Extra") > "Information" docextra/viewer/etc. since it can be useful to display > important stuff (specially to advanced users) that don`t really deserve a > dedicated view. > > Examples of stuff I`d personally like to see in that tab: > - Document Programming Right status (advanced) > - Document Script Right status (advanced) > - Document displayed with sheet X? (advanced) > - Document lock status? > - If it's terminal or not > - etc. > > Of course we can work on the naming if you like... tough it will be tough > to find a better name IMO :) > > Thanks, > Eduard > > > > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Eduard > > > > > >> > > >>> I agree that View Source could be moved in Information. > > >> > > >> Does it mean you’re ok with the other bullet point entries? > > >> > > >> Also I didn’t mention it, but this proposal means reorganizing the VMs > > >> (menu_content.vm and shortcuts.cm) since right now the vm for > > displaying > > >> the second part of the More Actions menu is called shortcuts.vm and > its > > >> first line is: > > >> > > >> #if (!$docextralinks && !$docextras) > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> -Vincent > > >> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> Caty > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi devs, > > >>>> > > >>>> Here’s the outcome of a discussion I had with Caty/Edy on IRC + > > addition > > >>>> of some elements of my own. > > >>>> > > >>>> The idea is to clarify our strategy for the “More Actions” menu. > > >>>> > > >>>> So here’s a proposal: > > >>>> > > >>>> * The More Actions menus is actually a "More" menu since it doesn't > > >>>> contain only actions. Specifically it contains 2 types of links: > > >>>> ** Actions such as Export, Annotate, Print, Share > > >>>> ** Information about the page (they're not actions): History, > > >>>> Comments/Annotations, Children, Attachments > > >>>> * The "View Source" entry is not placed correctly and should be > moved > > to > > >>>> the information section > > >>>> * The "Information" entry could be renamed or be made more specific > > >> since > > >>>> the whole section of the menu is about information about the page. > It > > >> used > > >>>> to contain children but that's been separated so all it contains now > > are > > >>>> included pages and backlinks. These could be transformed into 2 > > viewers: > > >>>> one for includes pages and one for backlinks > > >>>> * The extradocs tabs do not need to match the information section of > > the > > >>>> "More" menu. We only display in the tabs the most important actions. > > >>>> * Idea: In order not to have too many tabs and to simplify the UI, > we > > >>>> could decide to remove the Information one and have "Included Pages" > > and > > >>>> "Backlinks" only as menu entries. > > >>>> > > >>>> WDYT? > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks > > >>>> -Vincent > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
