Search: concept

I wonder if we cannot somehow merge the concepts together. I guess I'd need to see some examples for this.

I wonder if we cannot somehow merge the concepts together. I guess I'd need to see some examples for this.

Solution n°1 : Richer HTML (not used) This concept is to replace (in a lazy way) initial HTML by a richer HTML.

So, a new strategy, based on targeting content instead of documents is described by the following: a way to provide a reference to a field in an object in a document will be devised (for example, expanding the DocumentName concept) Annotation model changes to store such a reference to a field (or to the document itself in which case it means 'document content') annotation API changes as follows: where the renderAnnotatedContent can be replaced, in case of a HTML only based approach (as in the above solution), by a or syntax could default to XHTML, etc. on the client, when using the annotations one would need to mark the source (object field, document content, etc) of a piece of XHTML and the fact that it can be annotated.

=== ==== Solution n°1 : Richer HTML (not used) ==== This concept is to replace (in a lazy way) initial HTML by a richer HTML.

So, a new strategy, based on targeting content instead of documents is described by the following: * a way to provide a reference to a field in an object in a document will be devised (for example, expanding the DocumentName concept) * Annotation model changes to store such a reference to a field (or to the document itself in which case it means 'document content') * annotation API changes as follows: {{code}}void addAnnotation(String reference, Annotation ann) String renderAnnotatedContent(String reference, Set<Annotation>, String syntax) Set<Annotation> getAnnotations(String reference){{/code}} where the renderAnnotatedContent can be replaced, in case of a HTML only based approach (as in the above solution), by a {{code}}String getAnnotatedHTML(String reference, Set<Annotation> annotations){{/code}} or syntax could default to XHTML, etc

. == Proposal == {{html clean="false" wiki="true"}} * Component-oriented architecture using a Component Manager * Each component group (set of components for implementing a concept) is separated in its own build module and generates a JAR * Make the component 100% independent of the Component Manager used * Register the Component Manager using a Servlet Context Listener * Question: Should we use existing components from the Component Manager implementation?

It is generally based on the old cache services concepts even all the names changes but the more I'm working with JBoss cache the more I think this api need some changes as JBoss cache and OSCache has very different way to create there caches.

I'm thinking of introduce eviction algorithms concept like JBoss or cache4j do to replace the way restriction like capacity and timing are supported.

It is generally based on the old cache services concepts even all the names changes but the more I'm working with JBoss cache the more I think this api need some changes as JBoss cache and OSCache has very different way to create there caches. === Cache configuration overwriting === Code creating a cache can declare an cache configuration identifier which is used to try to find a configuration in a file for example depends on the cache implementation to overload the default settings cache by cache.

I'm thinking of introduce eviction algorithms concept like JBoss or cache4j do to replace the way restriction like capacity and timing are supported. == TODO == === Meta cache === for documents cache, Ludovic proposed the idea of something like a "meta cache" when we are using distributed cache: the idea is to only store the documents version in the distributed cache and store the reall document in a local cache.

Users have the possibility to enhance the public graphs locally by adding concepts and relations that make sense to them, involving local desktop resources, for the purpose of learning and memorizing.

It is also based on a view concept for the tailoring of ontologies. This view concept turned out to be of additional value, as it also provides a mechanism to impose different semantics on the same syntactical structure.

Users have the possibility to enhance the public graphs locally by adding concepts and relations that make sense to them, involving local desktop resources, for the purpose of learning and memorizing.

It is also based on a view concept for the tailoring of ontologies. This view concept turned out to be of additional value, as it also provides a mechanism to impose different semantics on the same syntactical structure. * SKOS http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20050510/ == Proposal == (% style="list-style-type: square" %) * Create a new JIRA project for describing use cases, tasks, requirements * Describe further the use cases * Create a first application implementation * Link the implementation with the PSEW prototype === Data model === See [[Design.HelpDeskDataModel]] == Other help desk systems == See [[Design.HelpDeskWatch]] == Roadmap == (% style="list-style-type: square" %) * 30 September 2007: release of a first implementation of the help desk * 15 October 2007: release of a report assessing the prototype from the user point of view * 30 October 2007: release of the second implementation, and presentation of the system at the [[eChallenges Conference>>http://www.echallenges.org/e2007/default.asp?

XWiki Help Desk Data Model Proposal of a preliminary data model/ The terms "Issue" and "IssueLog" are used preferably to "Question" and "Answer" since the help desk concepts are very close to the ones of an issue tracker, and using a common data model for both may be handy.

= XWiki Help Desk Data Model = Proposal of a preliminary data model/ The terms "Issue" and "IssueLog" are used preferably to "Question" and "Answer" since the help desk concepts are very close to the ones of an issue tracker, and using a common data model for both may be handy.

In order to do so, here is a list of criteria that we need to take into account : * Ease of use : the new layout of the editor needs to be easy to use for newcomes and people lowly familiar with the concept of a wiki ** Speed : how long it takes for an user to perform an action (from basic to complex ones) ** Feeling of control : whether or not the user feels like he is in control of his environment and the software-model matches the user-model of how a rich text editor should behave * Flexibility : XWiki is an extensible platform, therefore the editor look & feel needs to make sure that we can add new components easily when needed ** Add new menu options when new features are created (say, new macros) ** Allow for minimal customization of the menus as required for specific projects (say, a "my favorite buttons" toolbar) ** Offers a light mode that includes needed features while in form textarea edition (comments, description fields, basically any textarea field in the wiki) * Development Issues : we need to take into account the fact that we are or are not able to reuse existing components for the editor.

Note: could reuse the "Types" concept here maybe, with a built-in type "SPAM" that would automatically check some keywords against subject/body content ??

Note: could reuse the "Types" concept here maybe, with a built-in type "SPAM" that would automatically check some keywords against subject/body content ??

Design explorations: common widgets/features(UI wireframe) [100%]http://enterprise.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Features MILESTONE 1: Clear concept of what is to be coded/written http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#|t=extensions&p=1&l=30&s=doc.creationDate&d=desc&name=app Week 3 [4 June - 8 June].

Design explorations: common widgets/features(UI wireframe) [100%][[http://enterprise.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Features]] **MILESTONE 1: Clear concept of what is to be coded/written** [[http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#|t=extensions&p=1&l=30&s=doc.creationDate&d=desc&name=app]] Week 3 [4 June - 8 June].