On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 06:36, Ate Douma wrote: > I'd like to add a few comments to my proposal concerning the elements section of my > example (some of which > came up yesterday during a chat I had with David Sean Taylor). > > Here's the elements section again: > > <!-- Folder elements displayed in the menu (in the current example in tabmenu > if level < 3 or in treemenu otherwise) > in the order as defined > --> > <elements> > > <page id="page1" description="Page 1"/> > <page ref="../../subfolder2/page8"/> > <page ref="/subfolder1/subfolder2/page9" description="Page 9" /> > > <folder id="subfolder1"/> > <folder ref="/subfolder1/subfolder3"/> > > <link url="http://www.apache.org"; description="Home Apache" > target="_self"/> > <link url="http://portals.apache.org"; description="Home Apache Portals" > target="outside"/> > > <!-- hidden elements --> > <page id="page2" hidden="true"/> > <folder id="subfolder2" hidden="true"/> > > </elements>
So, we are going to have to have meta-data to describe the folder? I thought links were going to be simple text files with urls in them, not entries in meta-data. > > In my example all the elements for a menu node are specified, including those not to > be displayed > (hidden). The 'hidden' elements really are redundant in this example if all elements > are to be specified. > So you can just leave them out. -1. I think reversing it is a better idea so that only special cases (like hidden) need to be specified. The folder meta-data should be entirely optional. > > But, you still need to specify all which should be displayed. Furthermore, the order > in which they are > displayed is derived from it. > > One issue from the previous discussions was that we really should provide a > intuitive and easy menu configuration. > Although I think my proposal is very powerfull, it still requires a lot of > configuration (but far less then what's needed in J1). definte +1 on ease of use and heavy documentation ;) > > Maybe different strategies can be defined for deriving the elements, and their > order, so the elements section isn't > always, or not at all, needed. > One way could be allowing 'hidden' and 'order' attributes on Page and Folder > configurations. > Still, Link and element references will have to be defined. Maybe it could be done > in separate configurations (files) instead > of bundling them in one. Don't know if that would be an improvement though. Again, can't a link be a simple text file with a with a url or maybe it contains an <a href=""> </a> tag in it. > > Concerning the 'intuitive' menu definition issue: maybe what is needed is a change > of view. > In J1 you won't have a menu unless you define it (completely) on every page which > needs one. > Using this proposal, you usually have a standard menu definition (tabmenu on the > top, tree menu on the left or something similar). > Only thing needed is a proper menu node configuration instead of a complete > definition. > By default, a new Page could be automatically included in a menu unless it is made > 'hidden'. It really is more a question of in which folder > the Page should go to get it in the correct menu. +1. > And using Links and Page or Folder references is simply adding them to the correct > folder to get them included. > With Links and references the site navigation can be defined 'on top' of the folder > structure. +1. Simple and easy to understand, I like it. > > Regards, > > Ate > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
