+1 Thanks, Caty
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > This would obviously work only for non-terminal/nested pages. > > You might also want to think about handling excludes (i.e. all parent types > *except* this and that), and probably the case when you have both includes > and excludes. > > Also, the create UI (among others) would need to change a bit on the parent > selector (once you select a template provider with such restrictions), > probably by filtering the tree modal to show only pages of the restricted > type. > > Thanks, > Eduard > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > On 29 Nov 2016, at 10:23, Marius Dumitru Florea < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi devs, > > > > > > I have an XWiki application that creates two types of pages. Let's call > > > them Category and Procedure. The application has two template providers > > > that allow the users to create Categories and Procedures anywhere on > the > > > wiki using the Create Page menu. I would like to restrict the creation > > like > > > this: > > > > > > * You can create a new Category page either as a top level page or as a > > > child of an existing Category page > > > * You can create a new Procedure page only as a child of an existing > > > Category or Procedure page > > > > > > Category -> ... Category -> Procedure -> ... -> Procedure > > > > > > One solution to achieve this is to add a new property to the template > > > provider, e.g. "parentType", that specifies the type of pages (XClass > > > references) that are allowed as parent. We would use a Database List > with > > > multiple selection and relational storage. We can use the empty string > to > > > represent "no parent" (i.e. top level page). An empty list would mean > no > > > parent type restriction. > > > > > > Category template provider: {parentType: ["CategoryClass", ""]} > > > Procedure template provider: {parentType: ["CategoryClass", > > > "ProcedureClass"]} > > > > > > Do you think this is useful? Do you see any problem with this solution? > > Is > > > it worth implementing? > > > > If you need it then it means there’s a need (even though possibly not a > > very common one). The only downside I see is the complexity it adds for > the > > user. We may want to think about an Advanced section in the template > > provide UI screen and move advanced options there. > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > > Thanks, > > > Marius > > > > >
