[Chandler-dev] is a unified displayName a good thing?
twl at osafoundation.org
Tue Apr 18 14:17:51 PDT 2006
This topic came up for discussion in today's platform meeting (Alec
also joined us)
Here's where we seem to be:
We seem to have agreement that a 'title' attribute which would not be
localized (but would be indexed) is necessary
After that things get fuzzy, due mostly to i18n concerns. The big
place where this has impact is places in the UI where "displayName"
data appears - table column headers, detail view field labels, menus
and so forth. We also have a problem related to the ability to
switch locales because we currently store the localized version of
the strings in the displayName. There seem to be a lot of issues
left to tackle here and we aren't going to try to tackle them for
alpha2. Some of the possible solutions that we discussed included
1. ripping out displayName altogether and seeing what we actually needed
2. introducing a different attribute and placing that attribute only
on items whose names actually show through to the UI.
We are not going to try doing either of these for alpha2 but we will
need to tackle them for i18n reasons, if for no other. There's also
some uncertainty on the exact level of i18n functionality that we are
targetting for 0.7 and ultimately 1.0.
For alpha2, that leaves the introduction of a 'title' attribute on
ContentItem as the only active work item.
Does that sound accurate to people that were in the meeting?
Is there any additional comment? If there is not, I am going to
start looking at adding a 'title' attribute to ContentItem.
On Apr 18, 2006, at 12:24 PM, Brian Kirsch wrote:
> >>> So is the rule to display the title in preference to the
> displayName? It seems to me that the only time that displayName
> is really that >>> useful is when the item being displayed is an
> attribute name -- I can imagine localizing that data, I can't
> imagine localizing data
> >>> entered by the user. I guess you could have a displayName
> that was "Untitled foobar", which might make some sense to
> localize, >>> except that when display a summary view full of
> untitled items, you' just see a pile of "Untitled foobar" rows.
> I have always been a strong advocate of reworking the displayName.
> However, perhaps we should have a brief meeting or IRC chat to
> hammer out the specifics of the change. I want to make sure that
> adding the addition attribute 'title' really does meet our
> localiztion needs.
> For example, in previous iterations of adding title with
> displayName the title was going to be the localized field and
> displayName the system field. Having displayName be the localized
> field is fine I just want to make sure everyone is on the same page
> and that we consider the edge cases for localization such as the
> 'Untitled Folder' example Ted gave.
> Brian Kirsch - Cosmo Developer / Chandler Internationalization
> Open Source Applications Foundation
> 543 Howard St. 5th Floor
> San Francisco, CA 94105
> Ted Leung wrote:
>> On Apr 17, 2006, at 9:49 AM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
>>> Ted Leung wrote:
>>>> If you look at Bug 1745: <https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/
>>>> show_bug.cgi?id=1745>, you'll see that there's another issue
>>>> related to displayName / title, which is localization. I
>>>> think that the localization stuff points to a separate Title
>>>> attribute rather than displayName. I suppose that you could
>>>> even argue that the two names (title and displayName) are
>>>> reversed in their meanings if you have both of them - title
>>>> being the "system" name for the item and 'displayName' being
>>>> the text that is localized, indexed, and presented to the user.
>>> Hi Ted,
>>> I don't think your description above is exactly right. The way I
>>> see it, a "two different attributes" proposal should look
>>> something like this:
>>> - Title
>>> - typically data entered by the user (e.g. title of an event)
>>> - not localized
>>> - indexed, this is the attribute you want in end user searches
>>> - Display Name
>>> - system name
>>> - typically created by parcels: blocks, events, schema items,
>>> - localized (shows up in columns and other display elements)
>>> - not indexed, or indexed separately
>>> The motivator behind having one "displayName" or
>>> "displayAttribute" was a requirement that *any* item should be
>>> able to show up in a table and have some reasonable "display
>>> name". I think we can find a way to meet this requirement some
>>> other way -- the localization and index issues are clearly more
>>> important requirements. Right now we have no requirement to
>>> display blocks in tables, for example.
>>> +1 for two different attributes btw.
>> I know Alec was working on a writeup on this topic as well.
>> Alec, I'd be curious to know if Katie's ideas match up with
>> yours? If this is going to get into alpha2, we are going to
>> need to come to agreement fairly soon.
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
Ted Leung Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF)
More information about the chandler-dev