Odp:Development

From Odp

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Done List)
(Removing all content from page)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
This page is used to discuss new features between ODP administrators, testing templates or new extensions.
 
-
For tests or extension's example usage see [[Odp:Development/Tests]]
 
-
 
-
==ToDo List==
 
-
* Adding red asterisk for required fields in sf's css (issue described in this feedback's page: [[Feedback:Required_fields]])
 
-
* '''Scenarios'''
 
-
** use (with page-inclusion, same as elements).
 
-
*** '''Are we sure?''': I like the current solution, does not make the page too big (and difficult to read...) [[User:EnricoDaga|enrico]]
 
-
** '''Moving all the content to a Scenario's page'''
 
-
** '''[then]''' delete the properties Scenario and CPInstantiationExample for the fields 'Scenarios' and 'Examples (OWL files)
 
-
 
-
*'''Mail services'''
 
-
** when a new account request is posted, send e-mail to bureaucrats
 
-
** newsletter
 
-
** <del>Watch list with e-mail advertising: Improving the mediawiki feature 'Watch list' with email</del> Mediawiki already does it.
 
-
 
-
* '''Reviews'''
 
-
** 'ask for review'
 
-
* Create the Content OP Form (Template is the same as Content OP Proposal)
 
-
* browsing catalogue's owl through KANZAKI stylesheets (courtesy of http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/)
 
-
* replacing all application images .GIF and .JPG with equivalents .PNG or .SVG
 
-
 
-
* '''ODP Skin'''
 
-
 
-
==Done List==
 
-
* '''Distinguishing Open and QC Reviews (high priority)'''
 
-
** each Proposed Content OP has the possibility to be reviewed from its page by clicking on 'post a review'. <del>But if you are not a member of the QC you face an error page.</del> (fixed -enrico)
 
-
** I would like to fix this in the following way:
 
-
*** We allow all registered user to post a review but we distinguish QC reviews from open ones.
 
-
*** Is it possible to have only one link in the page (the one that is already there) and to redirect the user to either an 'Open Review' if (s)he is not a QC member, or to the official review if (s)he is a QC member?
 
-
** Motivations are the following:
 
-
*** The regular discussion pages are not effectively perceived from users.
 
-
*** We <del>want</del> now have actually an open review mechanism as well as an official one. 
 
-
*** <del>It is bad that a user is faced with an error page when his/her intent is to post a comment on a wiki. At least (s)he should be redirected to the correct page where is allowed to post. However, t would be much better to make such process transparent to the user (as described above).</del> -fixed
 
-
 
-
* [Reviews] Automatically insert the current version id when submitting a new Review not using a direct link from the proposal's page
 
-
* Addedd support for image file types: PNG, SVG
 
-
* Send article by e-mail extension (only for sysop)
 
-
*'''Scenarios'''
 
-
** Created pages: [[Community:Scenarios]], [[Template:All scenarios]]
 
-
** New category ''CPExample'' or ''Scenario'' for a new kind of page
 
-
** Template and form for scenarios (Description (Description), Image (GraphicallyRepresentedBy), OWL file (OWLImplementation -URL-) ).
 
-
** Create the property 'scenarioOf' to link the Scenario's page to the pattern(s)
 
-
** Adding a link for adding scenarios, and including the list of the related scenarios <del>(with page-inclusion, same as elements)</del>
 
-
 
-
* Added property: GraphicallyRepresentedBy for pattern diagram
 
-
* News procedure added from page [[Odp:News]]
 
-
* www.ontologydesignpatterns.org is now redirected to ontologydesignpatterns.org
 
-
* Activated Review's procedure related to VersionID of the article
 
-
* Extension ReplaceText installed, [[Special:ReplaceText| go to see it, admin!]]
 
-
 
-
==Improvements==
 
-
===FOAF===
 
-
* loading a User info directly from a FOAF file
 
-
* Adding a user to a personal friend list
 
-
===Open ID===
 
-
* OpenID
 

Revision as of 16:06, 17 June 2008

Personal tools
Quality Committee
Content OP publishers