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

Re: Lst editor.

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 13 , Dec 17, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 13 , Dec 18, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        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 3 of 13 , Dec 22, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 13 , Jan 9, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            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 5 of 13 , Jan 13, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              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.