[MAGNOLIA-1294] Simplify external handling of Templates, Paragraphs and Dialogs Created: 07/Jan/07 Updated: 04/Nov/15 Resolved: 04/Nov/15 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Magnolia |
| Component/s: | templating |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Oliver Lietz | Assignee: | Philipp Bärfuss |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 1 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Template: |
|
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
| Date of First Response: |
| Description |
|
This is an attempt to simplify the (external) handling of Templates, Paragraphs and Dialogs.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <name>mytemplate</name> </template> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <name>myparagraph</name> </paragraph> The system view is hard to read and blowed up by meta data. Maybe the document view makes handling easier but I was unable to find useful information and samples. The goal is to share general templates between different clients and developers. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Magnolia International [ 07/Jan/07 ] |
|
This could for instance make maintenance of bootstrap files much easier, and it could maybe be generalized to more concepts than just templates, paragraphs and dialogs: basically to all components that make an empty system useable and reproduceable. This could maybe be implemented as a secondary import/export, or a kind of filter on the current one. |
| Comment by Oliver Lietz [ 07/Jan/07 ] |
|
I did some work on making bootstrap files handling/modification easier. It wasn't accepted because Philipp thought property files are much handier (IMHO the XSL approach is more powerful - http://jira.magnolia.info/browse/MAGNOLIA-985). So before coding on that I would like to gather opinions and hints to avoid useless work and make this a useful feature for all Magnolia users. I share Grégory's opinion on bootstrap files. |
| Comment by Philipp Bracher [ 09/Jan/07 ] |
|
I like the idea of defining what really belongs to a node and what not, but in my opinion a schema is not really the best approach. You do not necessarily work with bootstrap-files nor is it a good idea to externalize config definitions to xml files at any other place. But we could achieve proper definitions by using proper jcr node types for dialogs, paragraphs, ... Anyway the current config tree is more to look at as a jcr browser and properties editor. In future we need better solutions for creating dialogs, ... We should create wizards including the proper validation. Means even if it sounds good in the first place, I think this won't lead to a good solution in the sense of usability. |
| Comment by Oliver Lietz [ 09/Jan/07 ] |
|
First there should be a way to share templates (config) between different instances with a minimum of data required in a human readable form. The meta data in a system view contains a lot of information which makes it difficult. The jcr: and mgnl: stuff is totally unrelated to data in a different instance (other client - whatever). But using general templates for different clients/instances is a common request. If you setup a new instance you have to fiddle around with bootstrap files and it is a PITA with the existing method of using system views. You don't start from scratch with creating templates, paragraphs and dialogs for every new client. The current way of creating templates, paragraphs and dialogs is sufficient for developers if you are able to reuse/import existing templates. I prefer the Unix way of doing things with plain files instead of shiny wizards which deny direct access to all information. Whether you use Schema, RELAX NG, DTD or any other method of validating input there should be proper documentation of these options/properties. I start collecting relating information in the wiki because I was unable to find something useful in the source and the docs. |
| Comment by Michael Mühlebach [ 04/Nov/15 ] |
|
Given the thousands of other issues we have open that are more highly requested, we won't be able to address this issue in the foreseeable future. Instead we will focus on issues with a higher impact, and more votes. |