Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Maitland
    Were you logged in?  You should have been able to add it as long as you are logged in. If not, let me know and I ll check the settings.
    Message 1 of 13 , Dec 3, 2009
      Were you logged in?  You should have been able to add it as long as you are logged in.
       
      If not, let me know and I'll check the settings.


      From: MotorViper <motorviper@...>
      To: pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thu, December 3, 2009 1:24:59 PM
      Subject: Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.

      Where on the wiki do I add this, I tried under 'Development Spec' but
      had a message that said I didn't have permission to edit the page.

      MV.

      thpr wrote:
      >
      > Mark,
      >
      > Great start, and I'm glad to see it written down to help other people
      > follow what is being planned. However, I would echo Kar's request to
      > have this on the Wiki.
      >
      > A few thoughts:
      >
      > 1) Overview
      >
      > My initial impression was that the two modes have different
      > UI/function. Stand-alone mode edits a PCC file (can't
      be done today),
      > while launched-from-PCGen mode edits the "custom object" file (which
      > is what the editor does today).
      >
      > Thus, the stand-alone mode involves selecting a PCC file, while the
      > launched-from-PCGen mode does not involve selection of a PCC or LST
      > file (it is based off the loaded data)
      >
      > 2) Dialog & File Selection Area
      >
      > Something to think about here that I'm not sure got discussed during
      > the code team meeting on the LST Editor: There can be a "context" to
      > LST files.
      >
      > Consider this "use case":
      >
      > I want to create a set of files for an RSRD expansion. In that case, I
      > need to be able to specify 3 things:
      > 1) The PCC file I want to save into (in your dialog today)
      > 2) The LST file I'm editing (in your dialog today)
      > 3) The PCC file(s) serving as a "context" of the PCC file being
      edited.
      >
      > #3 is important, so that you can do things like:
      > AUTO:FEAT|Dodge
      >
      > Without knowing the data is dependent upon the RSRD, you may flag
      > "Dodge" as an error (unconstructed reference) or something that the
      > user needs to build.
      >
      > So in order to be able to catch that the tokens are valid (as well as
      > provide a list of things the user still needs to build), you will need
      > to be able to provide context.
      >
      > What was initially in my head was a load screen where you define the
      > context, PCC file and LST file, and then an edit screen. There, you
      > could just display the PCC file and LST file (but do not allow
      > selection of them) in the actual edit screen. In that way the edit
      > screen can be used in both modes (one where the PCC and LST were set
      > by the load screen, one where it's pre-determined since it was
      >
      launched-from-PCGen). Don't take that as a literal requirement to do 2
      > screens, but consider the need for context and how you might design
      > that into the editor.
      >
      > 3) Use
      >
      > I'm a bit confused here. I would hope our data team could use the
      > editor for our files, which I think you're allowing with the "if they
      > answer no, confirm and continue" scenario. At some point in the past,
      > I had suggested that the "edit-in-place" mode (meaning the stand-alone
      > mode) would have a different border (like a thick blue line or
      > something that highlights that to the user). You may consider
      > something like that as well if they confirmed and continued.
      >
      > What I don't understand is - if they open in read-only mode, can
      > anything be done in the editor? Is the primary purpose there just to
      > provide the ability to copy/paste items to another editor
      instance?
      >
      > 4) Use
      >
      > "If a primary token is selected then the list of files associated with
      > the pcc file that can contain that token, plus 'new' and 'all' are
      > available. "
      >
      > I'm not following this. By primary token do you mean things like AUTO,
      > SPELLLEVEL, and the like? Or are you referring to PCC tokens like
      > TEMPLATE, CLASS, DOMAIN?
      >
      > I think the screen shots are great, but some "dummy" data in them
      > might help my comprehension.
      >
      > 5) Parsing
      >
      > I'm confused on the "parse" button. Parsing is cheap (relatively
      > speaking), so why can't we parse continuously? After some delay in
      > typing (0.5 sec?) we can parse the input and provide messages for
      > problems (as well as color the background if there is a problem).
      >
      > I'd much prefer to see some automation there vs. having to push a
      > button
      to get the system to parse the input. Having the automation can
      > allow at least structurally correct input to be forced (or you can't
      > go away from the tab - thinking Kar's #4 item here). There will be
      > some situations where you have to allow them to move away (e.g.
      > unconstructed references) and allow them to save the data, we just
      > need to provide some system of warning them that there are "errors"
      > when they save the data.
      >
      > 6) Tabs
      >
      > I'm honestly a bit lost on how the different sub-tabs interact. I'm
      > concerned there may be a lot of tab switching, but I can't tell if
      > that is a valid concern or my mis-understanding your descriptions so far.
      >
      > 7) To-Do List
      >
      > If you do:
      >
      > AUTO:FEAT|MyFeat
      >
      > from inside a Class called MyClass.
      >
      > This should initially generate a form of error (since MyFeat
      hasn't
      > been built).
      >
      > Consider having a list of "items left to build" for the items that
      > would otherwise produce "unconstructed references". I think that's
      > valuable so that people can tell from the editor whether they have a
      > self-consistent set of data (vs. having to do a full data load)
      >
      > 8) Kar's feedback
      >
      > A note - in my opinion anyway - on the priority of 3) and 3a) in Kar's
      > list. The items in 3) are final work, which is far from where we are
      > now. 3a) is a concern, but I don't want you held up waiting for Connor
      > to be at a point (school break) where you can interlock.
      >
      > TP.
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >
      > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      >
      Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.91/2542 - Release Date: 12/03/09 07:32:00
      >




      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links

      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_developers/

      <*> Your email settings:
          Individual Email | Traditional

      <*> To change settings online go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_developers/join
          (Yahoo! ID required)

      <*> To change settings via email:
          pcgen_developers-digest@yahoogroups.com
          pcgen_developers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          pcgen_developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

    • MotorViper
      The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
      Message 2 of 13 , Dec 9, 2009
        The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.

        Andrew Maitland wrote:
        > Were you logged in? You should have been able to add it as long as you
        > are logged in.
        > If not, let me know and I'll check the settings.
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > *From:* MotorViper <motorviper@...>
        > *To:* pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
        > *Sent:* Thu, December 3, 2009 1:24:59 PM
        > *Subject:* Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.
        >
        > Where on the wiki do I add this, I tried under 'Development Spec' but
        > had a message that said I didn't have permission to edit the page.
        >
        > MV.
        >
        > thpr wrote:
        > >
        > > Mark,
        > >
        > > Great start, and I'm glad to see it written down to help other people
        > > follow what is being planned. However, I would echo Kar's request to
        > > have this on the Wiki.
        > >
        > > A few thoughts:
        > >
        > > 1) Overview
        > >
        > > My initial impression was that the two modes have different
        > > UI/function. Stand-alone mode edits a PCC file (can't be done today),
        > > while launched-from-PCGen mode edits the "custom object" file (which
        > > is what the editor does today).
        > >
        > > Thus, the stand-alone mode involves selecting a PCC file, while the
        > > launched-from-PCGen mode does not involve selection of a PCC or LST
        > > file (it is based off the loaded data)
        > >
        > > 2) Dialog & File Selection Area
        > >
        > > Something to think about here that I'm not sure got discussed during
        > > the code team meeting on the LST Editor: There can be a "context" to
        > > LST files.
        > >
        > > Consider this "use case":
        > >
        > > I want to create a set of files for an RSRD expansion. In that case, I
        > > need to be able to specify 3 things:
        > > 1) The PCC file I want to save into (in your dialog today)
        > > 2) The LST file I'm editing (in your dialog today)
        > > 3) The PCC file(s) serving as a "context" of the PCC file being edited.
        > >
        > > #3 is important, so that you can do things like:
        > > AUTO:FEAT|Dodge
        > >
        > > Without knowing the data is dependent upon the RSRD, you may flag
        > > "Dodge" as an error (unconstructed reference) or something that the
        > > user needs to build.
        > >
        > > So in order to be able to catch that the tokens are valid (as well as
        > > provide a list of things the user still needs to build), you will need
        > > to be able to provide context.
        > >
        > > What was initially in my head was a load screen where you define the
        > > context, PCC file and LST file, and then an edit screen. There, you
        > > could just display the PCC file and LST file (but do not allow
        > > selection of them) in the actual edit screen. In that way the edit
        > > screen can be used in both modes (one where the PCC and LST were set
        > > by the load screen, one where it's pre-determined since it was
        > > launched-from-PCGen). Don't take that as a literal requirement to do 2
        > > screens, but consider the need for context and how you might design
        > > that into the editor.
        > >
        > > 3) Use
        > >
        > > I'm a bit confused here. I would hope our data team could use the
        > > editor for our files, which I think you're allowing with the "if they
        > > answer no, confirm and continue" scenario. At some point in the past,
        > > I had suggested that the "edit-in-place" mode (meaning the stand-alone
        > > mode) would have a different border (like a thick blue line or
        > > something that highlights that to the user). You may consider
        > > something like that as well if they confirmed and continued.
        > >
        > > What I don't understand is - if they open in read-only mode, can
        > > anything be done in the editor? Is the primary purpose there just to
        > > provide the ability to copy/paste items to another editor instance?
        > >
        > > 4) Use
        > >
        > > "If a primary token is selected then the list of files associated with
        > > the pcc file that can contain that token, plus 'new' and 'all' are
        > > available. "
        > >
        > > I'm not following this. By primary token do you mean things like AUTO,
        > > SPELLLEVEL, and the like? Or are you referring to PCC tokens like
        > > TEMPLATE, CLASS, DOMAIN?
        > >
        > > I think the screen shots are great, but some "dummy" data in them
        > > might help my comprehension.
        > >
        > > 5) Parsing
        > >
        > > I'm confused on the "parse" button. Parsing is cheap (relatively
        > > speaking), so why can't we parse continuously? After some delay in
        > > typing (0.5 sec?) we can parse the input and provide messages for
        > > problems (as well as color the background if there is a problem).
        > >
        > > I'd much prefer to see some automation there vs. having to push a
        > > button to get the system to parse the input. Having the automation can
        > > allow at least structurally correct input to be forced (or you can't
        > > go away from the tab - thinking Kar's #4 item here). There will be
        > > some situations where you have to allow them to move away (e.g.
        > > unconstructed references) and allow them to save the data, we just
        > > need to provide some system of warning them that there are "errors"
        > > when they save the data.
        > >
        > > 6) Tabs
        > >
        > > I'm honestly a bit lost on how the different sub-tabs interact. I'm
        > > concerned there may be a lot of tab switching, but I can't tell if
        > > that is a valid concern or my mis-understanding your descriptions so
        > far.
        > >
        > > 7) To-Do List
        > >
        > > If you do:
        > >
        > > AUTO:FEAT|MyFeat
        > >
        > > from inside a Class called MyClass.
        > >
        > > This should initially generate a form of error (since MyFeat hasn't
        > > been built).
        > >
        > > Consider having a list of "items left to build" for the items that
        > > would otherwise produce "unconstructed references". I think that's
        > > valuable so that people can tell from the editor whether they have a
        > > self-consistent set of data (vs. having to do a full data load)
        > >
        > > 8) Kar's feedback
        > >
        > > A note - in my opinion anyway - on the priority of 3) and 3a) in Kar's
        > > list. The items in 3) are final work, which is far from where we are
        > > now. 3a) is a concern, but I don't want you held up waiting for Connor
        > > to be at a point (school break) where you can interlock.
        > >
        > > TP.
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > >
        > >
        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version:
        > 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.91/2542 - Release Date: 12/03/09 07:32:00
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        > pcgen_develope! rs-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:pcgen_developers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.98/2552 - Release Date: 12/08/09 07:34:00
        >
        >
      • karianna03
        Hi all, I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper s page at:
        Message 3 of 13 , Dec 10, 2009
          Hi all,

          I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper's page at:

          http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=LST_Editor

          MotorViper: I still need to review the actual content again :), will comment again soon!

          K

          --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, MotorViper <motorviper@...> wrote:
          >
          > The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
          >
          > Andrew Maitland wrote:
          > > Were you logged in? You should have been able to add it as long as you
          > > are logged in.
          > > If not, let me know and I'll check the settings.
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > > *From:* MotorViper <motorviper@...>
          > > *To:* pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
          > > *Sent:* Thu, December 3, 2009 1:24:59 PM
          > > *Subject:* Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.
          > >
          > > Where on the wiki do I add this, I tried under 'Development Spec' but
          > > had a message that said I didn't have permission to edit the page.
          > >
          > > MV.
          > >
          > > thpr wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Mark,
          > > >
          > > > Great start, and I'm glad to see it written down to help other people
          > > > follow what is being planned. However, I would echo Kar's request to
          > > > have this on the Wiki.
          > > >
          > > > A few thoughts:
          > > >
          > > > 1) Overview
          > > >
          > > > My initial impression was that the two modes have different
          > > > UI/function. Stand-alone mode edits a PCC file (can't be done today),
          > > > while launched-from-PCGen mode edits the "custom object" file (which
          > > > is what the editor does today).
          > > >
          > > > Thus, the stand-alone mode involves selecting a PCC file, while the
          > > > launched-from-PCGen mode does not involve selection of a PCC or LST
          > > > file (it is based off the loaded data)
          > > >
          > > > 2) Dialog & File Selection Area
          > > >
          > > > Something to think about here that I'm not sure got discussed during
          > > > the code team meeting on the LST Editor: There can be a "context" to
          > > > LST files.
          > > >
          > > > Consider this "use case":
          > > >
          > > > I want to create a set of files for an RSRD expansion. In that case, I
          > > > need to be able to specify 3 things:
          > > > 1) The PCC file I want to save into (in your dialog today)
          > > > 2) The LST file I'm editing (in your dialog today)
          > > > 3) The PCC file(s) serving as a "context" of the PCC file being edited.
          > > >
          > > > #3 is important, so that you can do things like:
          > > > AUTO:FEAT|Dodge
          > > >
          > > > Without knowing the data is dependent upon the RSRD, you may flag
          > > > "Dodge" as an error (unconstructed reference) or something that the
          > > > user needs to build.
          > > >
          > > > So in order to be able to catch that the tokens are valid (as well as
          > > > provide a list of things the user still needs to build), you will need
          > > > to be able to provide context.
          > > >
          > > > What was initially in my head was a load screen where you define the
          > > > context, PCC file and LST file, and then an edit screen. There, you
          > > > could just display the PCC file and LST file (but do not allow
          > > > selection of them) in the actual edit screen. In that way the edit
          > > > screen can be used in both modes (one where the PCC and LST were set
          > > > by the load screen, one where it's pre-determined since it was
          > > > launched-from-PCGen). Don't take that as a literal requirement to do 2
          > > > screens, but consider the need for context and how you might design
          > > > that into the editor.
          > > >
          > > > 3) Use
          > > >
          > > > I'm a bit confused here. I would hope our data team could use the
          > > > editor for our files, which I think you're allowing with the "if they
          > > > answer no, confirm and continue" scenario. At some point in the past,
          > > > I had suggested that the "edit-in-place" mode (meaning the stand-alone
          > > > mode) would have a different border (like a thick blue line or
          > > > something that highlights that to the user). You may consider
          > > > something like that as well if they confirmed and continued.
          > > >
          > > > What I don't understand is - if they open in read-only mode, can
          > > > anything be done in the editor? Is the primary purpose there just to
          > > > provide the ability to copy/paste items to another editor instance?
          > > >
          > > > 4) Use
          > > >
          > > > "If a primary token is selected then the list of files associated with
          > > > the pcc file that can contain that token, plus 'new' and 'all' are
          > > > available. "
          > > >
          > > > I'm not following this. By primary token do you mean things like AUTO,
          > > > SPELLLEVEL, and the like? Or are you referring to PCC tokens like
          > > > TEMPLATE, CLASS, DOMAIN?
          > > >
          > > > I think the screen shots are great, but some "dummy" data in them
          > > > might help my comprehension.
          > > >
          > > > 5) Parsing
          > > >
          > > > I'm confused on the "parse" button. Parsing is cheap (relatively
          > > > speaking), so why can't we parse continuously? After some delay in
          > > > typing (0.5 sec?) we can parse the input and provide messages for
          > > > problems (as well as color the background if there is a problem).
          > > >
          > > > I'd much prefer to see some automation there vs. having to push a
          > > > button to get the system to parse the input. Having the automation can
          > > > allow at least structurally correct input to be forced (or you can't
          > > > go away from the tab - thinking Kar's #4 item here). There will be
          > > > some situations where you have to allow them to move away (e.g.
          > > > unconstructed references) and allow them to save the data, we just
          > > > need to provide some system of warning them that there are "errors"
          > > > when they save the data.
          > > >
          > > > 6) Tabs
          > > >
          > > > I'm honestly a bit lost on how the different sub-tabs interact. I'm
          > > > concerned there may be a lot of tab switching, but I can't tell if
          > > > that is a valid concern or my mis-understanding your descriptions so
          > > far.
          > > >
          > > > 7) To-Do List
          > > >
          > > > If you do:
          > > >
          > > > AUTO:FEAT|MyFeat
          > > >
          > > > from inside a Class called MyClass.
          > > >
          > > > This should initially generate a form of error (since MyFeat hasn't
          > > > been built).
          > > >
          > > > Consider having a list of "items left to build" for the items that
          > > > would otherwise produce "unconstructed references". I think that's
          > > > valuable so that people can tell from the editor whether they have a
          > > > self-consistent set of data (vs. having to do a full data load)
          > > >
          > > > 8) Kar's feedback
          > > >
          > > > A note - in my opinion anyway - on the priority of 3) and 3a) in Kar's
          > > > list. The items in 3) are final work, which is far from where we are
          > > > now. 3a) is a concern, but I don't want you held up waiting for Connor
          > > > to be at a point (school break) where you can interlock.
          > > >
          > > > TP.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version:
          > > 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.91/2542 - Release Date: 12/03/09 07:32:00
          > > >
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------
          > >
          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > > pcgen_develope! rs-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
          > > <mailto:pcgen_developers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > >
          > >
          > > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > > Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.98/2552 - Release Date: 12/08/09 07:34:00
          > >
          > >
          >
        • karianna03
          Hi all, So I ve read through it and have no real further comments to make. If everyone is happy with the current proposal I suggest we invite the broader
          Message 4 of 13 , Dec 17, 2009
            Hi all,

            So I've read through it and have no real further comments to make.

            If everyone is happy with the current proposal I suggest we invite the broader community to comment, thoughts?

            K

            --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "karianna03" <martijnverburg@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi all,
            >
            > I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper's page at:
            >
            > http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=LST_Editor
            >
            > MotorViper: I still need to review the actual content again :), will comment again soon!
            >
            > K
            >
            > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, MotorViper <motorviper@> wrote:
            > >
            > > The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
            > >
            > > Andrew Maitland wrote:
            > > > Were you logged in? You should have been able to add it as long as you
            > > > are logged in.
            > > > If not, let me know and I'll check the settings.
            > > >
            > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > > > *From:* MotorViper <motorviper@>
            > > > *To:* pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
            > > > *Sent:* Thu, December 3, 2009 1:24:59 PM
            > > > *Subject:* Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.
            > > >
            > > > Where on the wiki do I add this, I tried under 'Development Spec' but
            > > > had a message that said I didn't have permission to edit the page.
            > > >
            > > > MV.
            > > >
            > > > thpr wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > Mark,
            > > > >
            > > > > Great start, and I'm glad to see it written down to help other people
            > > > > follow what is being planned. However, I would echo Kar's request to
            > > > > have this on the Wiki.
            > > > >
            > > > > A few thoughts:
            > > > >
            > > > > 1) Overview
            > > > >
            > > > > My initial impression was that the two modes have different
            > > > > UI/function. Stand-alone mode edits a PCC file (can't be done today),
            > > > > while launched-from-PCGen mode edits the "custom object" file (which
            > > > > is what the editor does today).
            > > > >
            > > > > Thus, the stand-alone mode involves selecting a PCC file, while the
            > > > > launched-from-PCGen mode does not involve selection of a PCC or LST
            > > > > file (it is based off the loaded data)
            > > > >
            > > > > 2) Dialog & File Selection Area
            > > > >
            > > > > Something to think about here that I'm not sure got discussed during
            > > > > the code team meeting on the LST Editor: There can be a "context" to
            > > > > LST files.
            > > > >
            > > > > Consider this "use case":
            > > > >
            > > > > I want to create a set of files for an RSRD expansion. In that case, I
            > > > > need to be able to specify 3 things:
            > > > > 1) The PCC file I want to save into (in your dialog today)
            > > > > 2) The LST file I'm editing (in your dialog today)
            > > > > 3) The PCC file(s) serving as a "context" of the PCC file being edited.
            > > > >
            > > > > #3 is important, so that you can do things like:
            > > > > AUTO:FEAT|Dodge
            > > > >
            > > > > Without knowing the data is dependent upon the RSRD, you may flag
            > > > > "Dodge" as an error (unconstructed reference) or something that the
            > > > > user needs to build.
            > > > >
            > > > > So in order to be able to catch that the tokens are valid (as well as
            > > > > provide a list of things the user still needs to build), you will need
            > > > > to be able to provide context.
            > > > >
            > > > > What was initially in my head was a load screen where you define the
            > > > > context, PCC file and LST file, and then an edit screen. There, you
            > > > > could just display the PCC file and LST file (but do not allow
            > > > > selection of them) in the actual edit screen. In that way the edit
            > > > > screen can be used in both modes (one where the PCC and LST were set
            > > > > by the load screen, one where it's pre-determined since it was
            > > > > launched-from-PCGen). Don't take that as a literal requirement to do 2
            > > > > screens, but consider the need for context and how you might design
            > > > > that into the editor.
            > > > >
            > > > > 3) Use
            > > > >
            > > > > I'm a bit confused here. I would hope our data team could use the
            > > > > editor for our files, which I think you're allowing with the "if they
            > > > > answer no, confirm and continue" scenario. At some point in the past,
            > > > > I had suggested that the "edit-in-place" mode (meaning the stand-alone
            > > > > mode) would have a different border (like a thick blue line or
            > > > > something that highlights that to the user). You may consider
            > > > > something like that as well if they confirmed and continued.
            > > > >
            > > > > What I don't understand is - if they open in read-only mode, can
            > > > > anything be done in the editor? Is the primary purpose there just to
            > > > > provide the ability to copy/paste items to another editor instance?
            > > > >
            > > > > 4) Use
            > > > >
            > > > > "If a primary token is selected then the list of files associated with
            > > > > the pcc file that can contain that token, plus 'new' and 'all' are
            > > > > available. "
            > > > >
            > > > > I'm not following this. By primary token do you mean things like AUTO,
            > > > > SPELLLEVEL, and the like? Or are you referring to PCC tokens like
            > > > > TEMPLATE, CLASS, DOMAIN?
            > > > >
            > > > > I think the screen shots are great, but some "dummy" data in them
            > > > > might help my comprehension.
            > > > >
            > > > > 5) Parsing
            > > > >
            > > > > I'm confused on the "parse" button. Parsing is cheap (relatively
            > > > > speaking), so why can't we parse continuously? After some delay in
            > > > > typing (0.5 sec?) we can parse the input and provide messages for
            > > > > problems (as well as color the background if there is a problem).
            > > > >
            > > > > I'd much prefer to see some automation there vs. having to push a
            > > > > button to get the system to parse the input. Having the automation can
            > > > > allow at least structurally correct input to be forced (or you can't
            > > > > go away from the tab - thinking Kar's #4 item here). There will be
            > > > > some situations where you have to allow them to move away (e.g.
            > > > > unconstructed references) and allow them to save the data, we just
            > > > > need to provide some system of warning them that there are "errors"
            > > > > when they save the data.
            > > > >
            > > > > 6) Tabs
            > > > >
            > > > > I'm honestly a bit lost on how the different sub-tabs interact. I'm
            > > > > concerned there may be a lot of tab switching, but I can't tell if
            > > > > that is a valid concern or my mis-understanding your descriptions so
            > > > far.
            > > > >
            > > > > 7) To-Do List
            > > > >
            > > > > If you do:
            > > > >
            > > > > AUTO:FEAT|MyFeat
            > > > >
            > > > > from inside a Class called MyClass.
            > > > >
            > > > > This should initially generate a form of error (since MyFeat hasn't
            > > > > been built).
            > > > >
            > > > > Consider having a list of "items left to build" for the items that
            > > > > would otherwise produce "unconstructed references". I think that's
            > > > > valuable so that people can tell from the editor whether they have a
            > > > > self-consistent set of data (vs. having to do a full data load)
            > > > >
            > > > > 8) Kar's feedback
            > > > >
            > > > > A note - in my opinion anyway - on the priority of 3) and 3a) in Kar's
            > > > > list. The items in 3) are final work, which is far from where we are
            > > > > now. 3a) is a concern, but I don't want you held up waiting for Connor
            > > > > to be at a point (school break) where you can interlock.
            > > > >
            > > > > TP.
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
            > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version:
            > > > 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.91/2542 - Release Date: 12/03/09 07:32:00
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > ------------------------------------
            > > >
            > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > pcgen_develope! rs-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
            > > > <mailto:pcgen_developers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
            > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            > > > Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.98/2552 - Release Date: 12/08/09 07:34:00
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • Paul
            Hmm, I wonder if it might not be a good thing to have some way to grey out or filter items objects that shouldn t be in the same file. Like if a
            Message 5 of 13 , Dec 17, 2009
              Hmm, I wonder if it might not be a good thing to have some way to grey out or filter items objects that shouldn't be in the same file. Like if a feats/abilities file is being generated, then you can't put an equipment object in with it.

              Or was that listed and I just skipped over it?

              --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "karianna03" <martijnverburg@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi all,
              >
              > So I've read through it and have no real further comments to make.
              >
              > If everyone is happy with the current proposal I suggest we invite the broader community to comment, thoughts?
              >
              > K
              >
              > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "karianna03" <martijnverburg@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Hi all,
              > >
              > > I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper's page at:
              > >
              > > http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=LST_Editor
              > >
              > > MotorViper: I still need to review the actual content again :), will comment again soon!
              > >
              > > K
              > >
              > > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, MotorViper <motorviper@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
              > > >
              > > > Andrew Maitland wrote:
              > > > > Were you logged in? You should have been able to add it as long as you
              > > > > are logged in.
              > > > > If not, let me know and I'll check the settings.
              > > > >
              > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
              > > > > *From:* MotorViper <motorviper@>
              > > > > *To:* pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > *Sent:* Thu, December 3, 2009 1:24:59 PM
              > > > > *Subject:* Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Lst editor.
              > > > >
              > > > > Where on the wiki do I add this, I tried under 'Development Spec' but
              > > > > had a message that said I didn't have permission to edit the page.
              > > > >
              > > > > MV.
              > > > >
              > > > > thpr wrote:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Mark,
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Great start, and I'm glad to see it written down to help other people
              > > > > > follow what is being planned. However, I would echo Kar's request to
              > > > > > have this on the Wiki.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > A few thoughts:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 1) Overview
              > > > > >
              > > > > > My initial impression was that the two modes have different
              > > > > > UI/function. Stand-alone mode edits a PCC file (can't be done today),
              > > > > > while launched-from-PCGen mode edits the "custom object" file (which
              > > > > > is what the editor does today).
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Thus, the stand-alone mode involves selecting a PCC file, while the
              > > > > > launched-from-PCGen mode does not involve selection of a PCC or LST
              > > > > > file (it is based off the loaded data)
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 2) Dialog & File Selection Area
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Something to think about here that I'm not sure got discussed during
              > > > > > the code team meeting on the LST Editor: There can be a "context" to
              > > > > > LST files.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Consider this "use case":
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I want to create a set of files for an RSRD expansion. In that case, I
              > > > > > need to be able to specify 3 things:
              > > > > > 1) The PCC file I want to save into (in your dialog today)
              > > > > > 2) The LST file I'm editing (in your dialog today)
              > > > > > 3) The PCC file(s) serving as a "context" of the PCC file being edited.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > #3 is important, so that you can do things like:
              > > > > > AUTO:FEAT|Dodge
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Without knowing the data is dependent upon the RSRD, you may flag
              > > > > > "Dodge" as an error (unconstructed reference) or something that the
              > > > > > user needs to build.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > So in order to be able to catch that the tokens are valid (as well as
              > > > > > provide a list of things the user still needs to build), you will need
              > > > > > to be able to provide context.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > What was initially in my head was a load screen where you define the
              > > > > > context, PCC file and LST file, and then an edit screen. There, you
              > > > > > could just display the PCC file and LST file (but do not allow
              > > > > > selection of them) in the actual edit screen. In that way the edit
              > > > > > screen can be used in both modes (one where the PCC and LST were set
              > > > > > by the load screen, one where it's pre-determined since it was
              > > > > > launched-from-PCGen). Don't take that as a literal requirement to do 2
              > > > > > screens, but consider the need for context and how you might design
              > > > > > that into the editor.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 3) Use
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I'm a bit confused here. I would hope our data team could use the
              > > > > > editor for our files, which I think you're allowing with the "if they
              > > > > > answer no, confirm and continue" scenario. At some point in the past,
              > > > > > I had suggested that the "edit-in-place" mode (meaning the stand-alone
              > > > > > mode) would have a different border (like a thick blue line or
              > > > > > something that highlights that to the user). You may consider
              > > > > > something like that as well if they confirmed and continued.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > What I don't understand is - if they open in read-only mode, can
              > > > > > anything be done in the editor? Is the primary purpose there just to
              > > > > > provide the ability to copy/paste items to another editor instance?
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 4) Use
              > > > > >
              > > > > > "If a primary token is selected then the list of files associated with
              > > > > > the pcc file that can contain that token, plus 'new' and 'all' are
              > > > > > available. "
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I'm not following this. By primary token do you mean things like AUTO,
              > > > > > SPELLLEVEL, and the like? Or are you referring to PCC tokens like
              > > > > > TEMPLATE, CLASS, DOMAIN?
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I think the screen shots are great, but some "dummy" data in them
              > > > > > might help my comprehension.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 5) Parsing
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I'm confused on the "parse" button. Parsing is cheap (relatively
              > > > > > speaking), so why can't we parse continuously? After some delay in
              > > > > > typing (0.5 sec?) we can parse the input and provide messages for
              > > > > > problems (as well as color the background if there is a problem).
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I'd much prefer to see some automation there vs. having to push a
              > > > > > button to get the system to parse the input. Having the automation can
              > > > > > allow at least structurally correct input to be forced (or you can't
              > > > > > go away from the tab - thinking Kar's #4 item here). There will be
              > > > > > some situations where you have to allow them to move away (e.g.
              > > > > > unconstructed references) and allow them to save the data, we just
              > > > > > need to provide some system of warning them that there are "errors"
              > > > > > when they save the data.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 6) Tabs
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I'm honestly a bit lost on how the different sub-tabs interact. I'm
              > > > > > concerned there may be a lot of tab switching, but I can't tell if
              > > > > > that is a valid concern or my mis-understanding your descriptions so
              > > > > far.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 7) To-Do List
              > > > > >
              > > > > > If you do:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > AUTO:FEAT|MyFeat
              > > > > >
              > > > > > from inside a Class called MyClass.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > This should initially generate a form of error (since MyFeat hasn't
              > > > > > been built).
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Consider having a list of "items left to build" for the items that
              > > > > > would otherwise produce "unconstructed references". I think that's
              > > > > > valuable so that people can tell from the editor whether they have a
              > > > > > self-consistent set of data (vs. having to do a full data load)
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 8) Kar's feedback
              > > > > >
              > > > > > A note - in my opinion anyway - on the priority of 3) and 3a) in Kar's
              > > > > > list. The items in 3) are final work, which is far from where we are
              > > > > > now. 3a) is a concern, but I don't want you held up waiting for Connor
              > > > > > to be at a point (school break) where you can interlock.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > TP.
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version:
              > > > > 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.91/2542 - Release Date: 12/03/09 07:32:00
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > ------------------------------------
              > > > >
              > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > pcgen_develope! rs-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > <mailto:pcgen_developers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              > > > > Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.98/2552 - Release Date: 12/08/09 07:34:00
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • motorviper@ymail.com
              The LST editor will be more restrictive than this in that only tokens that can be used in the active file will be listed for editing.
              Message 6 of 13 , Dec 18, 2009
                The LST editor will be more restrictive than this in that only tokens that can be used in the active file will be listed for editing.

                --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <nylanfs@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hmm, I wonder if it might not be a good thing to have some way to grey out or filter items objects that shouldn't be in the same file. Like if a feats/abilities file is being generated, then you can't put an equipment object in with it.
                >
                > Or was that listed and I just skipped over it?
                >
              • karianna03
                FYI, I ve asked the main list to start commenting on the LST Editor (apologies if I stole your lead there Motorviper). K
                Message 7 of 13 , Dec 22, 2009
                  FYI, I've asked the main list to start commenting on the LST Editor (apologies if I stole your lead there Motorviper).

                  K

                  --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "motorviper@..." <motorviper@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > The LST editor will be more restrictive than this in that only tokens that can be used in the active file will be listed for editing.
                  >
                  > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <nylanfs@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Hmm, I wonder if it might not be a good thing to have some way to grey out or filter items objects that shouldn't be in the same file. Like if a feats/abilities file is being generated, then you can't put an equipment object in with it.
                  > >
                  > > Or was that listed and I just skipped over it?
                  > >
                  >
                • James Dempsey
                  Hi, I have added my feedback to the talk page http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=Talk:LST_Editor The proposal looks pretty sound to me. I m keen to get
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jan 9, 2010
                    Hi,

                    I have added my feedback to the talk page
                    http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=Talk:LST_Editor

                    The proposal looks pretty sound to me. I'm keen to get started. :)

                    Cheers,
                    James.

                    On 17/12/2009 10:42 PM karianna03 wrote
                    > Hi all,
                    >
                    > So I've read through it and have no real further comments to make.
                    >
                    > If everyone is happy with the current proposal I suggest we invite the broader community to comment, thoughts?
                    >
                    > K
                    >
                    > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "karianna03" <martijnverburg@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >> Hi all,
                    >>
                    >> I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper's page at:
                    >>
                    >> http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=LST_Editor
                    >>
                    >> MotorViper: I still need to review the actual content again :), will comment again soon!
                    >>
                    >> K
                    >>
                    >> --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, MotorViper <motorviper@> wrote:
                    >>
                    >>> The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
                    >>>
                  • motorviper@ymail.com
                    James, I ve looked at your comments and, where relevant, am merging them in. Just two comments on the comments! 1. I want to leave PCC file editing in there as
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jan 13, 2010
                      James,

                      I've looked at your comments and, where relevant, am merging them in. Just two comments on the comments!

                      1. I want to leave PCC file editing in there as the idea is to make this into a stand-alone facility for adding/modifying content.

                      2. Some things such as PCC file editing may need to wait until a later version but my document is designed to be how I'd like the editor to be eventually. As new ideas get added this is where they should be put and a subset of it used as the help page.

                      Hope this makes sense. Work will start as soon as I have time, christmas etc. have slowed me down a bit.

                      Mark.


                      --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, James Dempsey <jdempsey@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hi,
                      >
                      > I have added my feedback to the talk page
                      > http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=Talk:LST_Editor
                      >
                      > The proposal looks pretty sound to me. I'm keen to get started. :)
                      >
                      > Cheers,
                      > James.
                      >
                      > On 17/12/2009 10:42 PM karianna03 wrote
                      > > Hi all,
                      > >
                      > > So I've read through it and have no real further comments to make.
                      > >
                      > > If everyone is happy with the current proposal I suggest we invite the broader community to comment, thoughts?
                      > >
                      > > K
                      > >
                      > > --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, "karianna03" <martijnverburg@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >> Hi all,
                      > >>
                      > >> I took the liberty of merging in some information from the Major Projects Link, so that is now part of MotorViper's page at:
                      > >>
                      > >> http://wiki.pcgen.org/index.php?title=LST_Editor
                      > >>
                      > >> MotorViper: I still need to review the actual content again :), will comment again soon!
                      > >>
                      > >> K
                      > >>
                      > >> --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com, MotorViper <motorviper@> wrote:
                      > >>
                      > >>> The spec (slightly updated) is now under development specs on the wiki.
                      > >>>
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.