Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#13 2008-01-04 01:00:30
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: status in txp:article as list
Then what’s the point of “hidden”? or “draft” or…?
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
guiguibonbon wrote:
I know you people don’t want us to display hidden articles. Know how that feels like, product-wise? Like my car disabling me to push the radiator button because it thinks it’s already warm enough. See, I might have my own reasons to want more heat. Just let me push the button already.
Anyway, I’m working on a patch.
Pending, draft and hidden articles are not intended for display on the public side otherwise they would be named differently. You are of course free to modify TXP in anyway you see fit, but I for one do not see any reason to include such functionality in TXP core.
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
IMHO, we suffer from unclear semantics regarding the purpose of the article status.
Hidden, draft, pending and live are intended as workflow states controling how various roles interact with articles (freelancer, publisher,…), while sticky is a presentational flag which better was represented as a checkbox that adds to any of the other four stati.
I agree with Ruud that we shouldn’t add to the existing confusion by encouraging the use of workflow flags for presentation.
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
wet wrote:
Hidden, draft, pending and live are intended as workflow states controling how various roles interact with articles (freelancer, publisher,…), while sticky is a presentational flag which better was represented as a checkbox that adds to any of the other four stati.
Ahhhh *lightbulb goes on* a very neat explanation wet, thanks. Having only ever known TXP have 5 distinct statuses it always seemed odd to me to have what appears on the surface to be 5 “levels” of document of which only 2 were “visible”.
When I was a total n00b, I initally assumed (naively) that ‘draft’ might be used to allow authors to “preview” the document without it being active in any of the article lists, thus “hidden” from view for most users while allowing authors with a particular access level to see exactly what their doc will look like when it’s finally integrated into the site and published.
Maybe I should have the read the FAQ or Textbook 101 entry that explains what each status is for, and the typical role for which each is intended… is there one?
The smd plugin menagerie — for when you need one more gribble of power from Textpattern. Bleeding-edge code available on GitHub.
Txp Builders – finely-crafted code, design and Txp
Offline
#17 2008-01-04 17:08:59
- guiguibonbon
- Member
- Registered: 2006-02-20
- Posts: 296
Re: status in txp:article as list
wet wrote:
IMHO, we suffer from unclear semantics regarding the purpose of the article status.
Hidden, draft, pending and live are intended as workflow states controling how various roles interact with articles (freelancer, publisher,…), while sticky is a presentational flag which better was represented as a checkbox that adds to any of the other four stati.
I agree on that. I actually think it’s a rather overcomplicated and confusing workflow pattern and wonder how much it’s actually being used. And by who : I mean, you have to be a real prick to want to put so much hierarchy for its own sake in it.
Mary wrote:
Then what’s the point of “hidden”? or “draft” or…?
If it were called “unpublished” I could answer that. Right now I’d say making the, er… what’s the name, Managing Editor or whatever, feel powerful. And others feel miserable.
Bloke wrote:
Maybe I should have the read the FAQ or Textbook 101 entry that explains what each status is for, and the typical role for which each is intended… is there one?
Read above.
I’ll get back to the rest once I’ll have made more progress on that patch.
Offline
#18 2008-01-04 17:12:31
- guiguibonbon
- Member
- Registered: 2006-02-20
- Posts: 296
Re: status in txp:article as list
When I was a total n00b, I initally assumed (naively) that ‘draft’ might be used to allow authors to “preview” the document without it being active in any of the article lists, thus “hidden” from view for most users while allowing authors with a particular access level to see exactly what their doc will look like when it’s finally integrated into the site and published.
That’s actually part of what I intend to make possible easier with the patch.
Last edited by guiguibonbon (2008-01-04 17:13:01)
Offline
#19 2008-01-06 03:47:17
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: status in txp:article as list
…and wonder how much it’s actually being used. And by who : I mean, you have to be a real prick to want to put so much hierarchy for its own sake in it.
Just because you can’t make use of a feature does not give you the right to insult those who can. Argue the costs/benefits, not an opinion of the developer’s/user’s personality.
Offline
#20 2008-01-06 05:01:01
- guiguibonbon
- Member
- Registered: 2006-02-20
- Posts: 296
Re: status in txp:article as list
That was humour. Sort of. An exaggerative statement to highlight how the different privileges and stati are entirely arbitrary, technically unfunded and have no other intent but to hierarchise up to a somewhat amusing level. And, in my experience, never really manage to fit regular needs.
But I’m OK with it. It’s one of those quirky things about textpattern that give it a certain charm. Like the css-editor. That one is funny too. The most elaborate and yet essentially useless feature there is.
Last edited by guiguibonbon (2008-01-06 05:02:28)
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
Fearing I fall under the “humourous” description above, I hesitate to admit that the workflow makes sense to me; but it does.
Worse, I mostly like it. In my mind there is a difference between an article in draft state and an article submitted for approval (pending) and a published article. That’s three statuses from a work flow standpoint, and that doesn’t seem excessive to me. Once approved and published, it can be presented (or not presented as the case may be) using “live”, “sticky”, or “hidden”. I see a use for each.
I agree there seems to be a semantical issue. I second the idea that “sticky” shouldn’t be handled as part of the work flow. I can see a use for hidden at times as well; if I understand it correctly, it also should be handled in the same way as sticky – as different than part of the work flow. Live can be confusing; it makes me think of “published”, but then “sticky” is “live” in the sense of being published.
It might be more clear if there were two columns: Work Flow Status: draft -> pending -> published (or “live”), and a second column for how its presented: Published Status: dynamic (or live or normal) / sticky / hidden. The second column could be set any time, but only would apply when the first column was set to “published” or “live”.
But I can live with it the way it is. And support those who want a hack or plugin to change it.
My late night, bleary-eyed 2 cents. :)
Mike
Last edited by maverick (2008-01-06 06:13:52)
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
Bloke wrote:
Maybe I should have the read the FAQ or Textbook 101 entry that explains what each status is for, and the typical role for which each is intended… is there one?
Cheers!
Last edited by Gocom (2008-01-06 06:14:01)
Offline
#23 2008-01-06 13:32:44
- guiguibonbon
- Member
- Registered: 2006-02-20
- Posts: 296
Re: status in txp:article as list
Fearing I fall under the “humourous” description above, I hesitate to admit that the workflow makes sense to me; but it does.
Shure, it makes sense. Like the css-editor does. But in normal situations, I think you would just agree between editing parties that one member prefers to read stuff before it is being published. And you point out that you mildly appreciate your own stuff to be edited by others. And then just trust the people you work with. I doubt, but actually have no idea, that even newspapers use such a stiff permission-based and restrictive workflow.
In other words, the system looks more like it has been designed for some Chinese communist party website. Since it’s been the same from day one, I guess, but again have no actually idea, permissions was a must-have feature in 2001, and Dean just had some fun seeing what he could come up with. The fact it’s still there, and unchanged, probably reflects both something about how little interest it generates, and how textpattern is being developed (drawn mostly by user request). Again, I don’t think it’s a negative thing per se.
Offline
Re: status in txp:article as list
Thanks for the links Gocom, knew it had to be in there somewhere! Who’d have thought it would be in the document about the Write Tab
*Stef looks down at his shoes in embarrassment*
The smd plugin menagerie — for when you need one more gribble of power from Textpattern. Bleeding-edge code available on GitHub.
Txp Builders – finely-crafted code, design and Txp
Offline