[Pmwiki-users] Re: Re: Autosave on Preview
John Rankin
john.rankin
Mon Jul 12 18:39:18 CDT 2004
On Monday, 12 July 2004 8:58 PM, Christian Ridderstr?m <chr at home.se> wrote:
>Work flow:
>> An author edits a page and presses Preview, but doesn't Save.
>> We might change the Preview button to read Draft.
>
>Maybe as "Save as draft"? Although I might prefer keeping 'Preview' and
>add an additional "Save as draft".
For a local customisation, it's more work to add a new button
than to change the wording of an existing button. How about
'Preview & Save as draft'
>
>> On normal browse viewing, the page title gains a <sup>*</sup>,
>> indicating that this page has a draft associated with it.
>> Clicking on the * shows a browse of the draft.
>
>Nice! Btw, the '<sup>*</sup>' should get a title element or something that
>explains what it means.
Yup, the <a> ref will include title='View page draft'.
>
>> The Edit Page link also gains a <sup>*</sup>, indicating that
>> editing the page will edit the draft.
>
>The entire 'Edit' link could get an descriptive element as well. E.g. in
>normal usage the "help text" could be: "Edits the contents of this page",
>but when a draft exists, the text could be changed to:
> "Edit the existing draft of this page"
>I'm not sure I like these particular text messages, but you ought to get
>the idea.
Yup.
>
>> When browsing a draft, the page title loses the *, but the
>> Edit Page* link keeps it. That might be a bit too subtle --
>> perhaps there should be a 'draft' watermark behind the page
>> text.
>
>A water would be needed, or some other very visible indication
>I think.
Probably in the place that the * goes on normal browse view.
>
>> So a regular browse view looks like:
>>
>> Group Recent Changes
>> Page Name* ...
>> Edit Page*
>
>Maybe the '*' is more visible if we put it first?
>> Group Recent Changes
>> *Page Name ...
>> *Edit Page
How about:
>> Group Recent Changes
>> Page Name* ...
>> *Edit Page
and clicking the * brings you to:
>> Group Recent Changes
>> Page Name Draft ...
>> *Edit Page
and possibly (see below) clicking the Draft deletes the
draft version; or, clicking Draft /edits/ the draft and
*Edit Page becomes Delete Draft
>
>
>> Suppose an author creates a reference to a new page, clicks
>> the ?, edits the content, presses Preview and doesn't Save.
>>
>> In the referring page, instead of a ? against the page name,
>> we see a * -- clicking the * takes you to a browse of the
>> draft.
>
>Also nice.
>
>> One might ask for a password before allowing someone to
>> view a draft, if required.
>
>I think password requirements should be same as for read/edit.
We should be able to support the following:
- to prevent unauthorised viewing of a draft, set a read
password for the 'draft' action
- to prevent unauthorised saving of a draft, set an edit
password for the edit and post action
So in theory, we should be able to let anyone edit, but only
those with a password can save.
>
>> Whenever you press Save, the draft is removed, so the
>> various * marks disappear.
>
>Ok, so 'Page*' is only used when a "normal" page doesn't exist, but a
>draft branch exists.
Yup
>
>> So far, the draft is just 'a page that hasn't yet been
>> saved' -- we need to have a way to abandon the draft
>> unsaved. So I think when viewing a draft, there has to
>> be an Abandon Draft (no undo) link, or something similar.
>
>Hmm, is that what I labelled "Save as draft" earlier? Nah... you mean
>something like "Delete draft", right?
Yup -- still not sure the best way to show this. I don't
particularly like putting Delete where Edit normally goes (above).
Muscle memory will cause people to delete when they mean to edit
and there's no way back.
>
>> So this scheme doesn't give multiple drafts, but is it
>> sufficient as a first and minimalist attempt at the feature?
>> Are there any essential capabilities missing?
>
>I have the feeing that we're missing something here, but I can't put my
>finger on it right now... oh well, I'll just send this now. Perhaps it's
>about conflicts when two persons are working simultaneously the
>draft?
Not supported for a 1.0 local customisation. I thought about
giving people the option to Edit Draft or Edit Original, but
it just got too confusing. I think writers ought to make a
conscious decision to delete a draft, rather than have it
happen as a side-effect of editing the original.
>
>Maybe it'd be best to implement it and see how it works?
>
I'll see what I can come up with.
--
JR
--
John Rankin
More information about the pmwiki-users
mailing list