henrik at bechmannsoftware.com
Mon Nov 28 14:19:08 CST 2005
>>However, as I've understood the
various proposals the "edit" action would *always* come up with a draft,
No, I meant that the edit action would come up with a draft *only if a
draft copy is present*. A draft copy would only be present IF an edit
user had previously explicitly decided to save a draft (radio button
choice between "publish" and "save as draft") before save. The CHOICE of
saving a draft would only be presented on the edit form if the drafting
capability had been activated for the scope (as usual page, group, or
farm). I imagine this choice would always default to "publish", so that
for minor edits, or an edit that was completed in one sitting, the page
would be saved as normal, no draft copy.
IOW when the user hits edit, in the presence of the draft=on setting,
PmWiki would look for a draft, (GroupName.PageName-Draft) and if present
present that page for edit (not GroupName.PageName), and add the THIS IS
A DRAFT note. If no draft page were available, then PmWiki would present
the published page, no note required (or as you say users could by
default look for the "-Draft" suffix. Perhaps the administrator could
add a further conditional note as you say.)
So from the user's point of view he/she would select to save as draft
only if his/her work were incomplete, knowing that he/she as a result is
temporarily blocking edit on the basic published form.
When the user (any user with edit authorization) was done with the
draft, then the user would save as "publish" and the draft copy would be
>>For these applications introducing the concept of
"drafts/release cycle" would tend to confuse/discourage authors.
Then those applications would simply choose not to turn on the draft option.
Thanks for the additional tips.
Have you decided if you're going to do something like this?
More information about the pmwiki-users