Re: emove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Martin Giljohann <mm...@gmx.net>]

I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.

However I disagree with the general idea of not considering authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than speeding up the caching.

Regards
Martin


Allen Gilliland wrote:

> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
>
> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation which could all be removed.
>
> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their work their.
>
> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
>
> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
>
> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
>
> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number of models and macros.
>
> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
>
> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
>
> Thoughts?  Opinions?
>
> -- Allen
>
>


-- 


Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Brian Blakeley <we...@labourunions.com>]

I agree completely with Dave's comments and usage observations.  


Brian
cheblogs.com/


On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 12:13 +0100, Dave Johnson wrote:
> Comments below...
> 
> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> > Matt Raible wrote:
> > > On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> > >> Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am
> > >> still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are you
> > >> guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between the
> > >> authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?
> > >
> > > Yes, I use it all the time for that.  It's a force of habit more than
> > > anything.  If I was smart, I'd use two tabs, but after posting
> > > thousands of blog entries, habits form. ;-)
> 
> We definitely got a very good reaction when we introduced those edit
> links. They are very convenient. It's easy to browse old entries and
> edit them when you find problems. You might arrive at an old entry
> after browing somebody else's blog and finding a link back to your
> blog, or after doing a google search or recieving a comment
> notification -- it's very convenient to be able to simply click the
> edit link to started editing.
> 
> And there are other convenient things we could do like showing an
> unapproved comment count for each entry and a link to the entry's
> comment management page.
> 
> 
> > That was basically what I was thinking but couldn't articulate it for
> > some reason.  It does seem more to me like this is a feature that some
> > people may be used to because it's there, not because there is a real
> > need for it.
> 
> It's not just for preview. I use the edit link to go from old entries
> to the edit interface and I used the in-page editor-menu to access the
>  bookmarks, settings, settings and other pages in the interface. I
> also use the toggle-linkback links to change visibility of linkbacks.
> Those things are a daily part of my Roller usage and I really do not
> want to see them go away.
> 
> We've already made the caching of logged-in pages optional; doesn't
> that solve the problem that you are concerned about.
> 
> 
> > I can see a reason why you might publish and entry and go immediately to
> > your blog page to take a final look at it, then decide you need to make
> > an edit, but aside from the past entry or 2 i don't see why you would
> > first login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your weblog
> > so that you can edit an entry that is multiple days/months old.  Or why
> > you would login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your
> > blog so that you can use the "Website:Settings" link there instead of
> > just using the link on the main menu page of the authoring interface.
> 
> I spend time browing my blog, tweaking the them and moving back
> and forth between the editor interface and my blog. I'd like be able to
> do more of that not less.
> 
> 
> > In any case, as an alternative I would probably propose that instead of
> > linking back and forth between the fully published weblog pages and the
> > authoring interface that we instead expand the capabilities of the
> > preview servlet to meet this need instead.  The preview servlet seems
> > like the ideal venue for this exact situation and can offer *way* more
> > benefits since we can do things with the preview servlet which we
> > wouldn't be able to do on the real pages.
> >
> > For example, perhaps the preview servlet should render draft entries so
> > that the weblog author can see how their entry will fit in with the
> > entire rendered page, rather than using the fairly simple entry preview
> > mode that we have now?  This way you can get a true preview of the way
> > the entry will look, but without having to publish it first.  Also,
> > maybe we can find a way to setup the preview servlet so that it can
> > render using unsaved template changes as well.  That would be extremely
> > beneficial since you would be able to work on templates without having
> > to affect how your rendered blog looks.  And on and on.
> 
> Yes! Absolutely. We should rip out the old preview feature and provide
> a real preview that shows the blog entry as it will appear on the
> blog.
> 
> I think there are a lot of cool UI things we can do by knowing the
> logged in state of the user when we render the blog so I strongly
> object to removing that ability from the page models.
> We need to make the UI easier to use, so let's not short-change users
> just to save a little space in the cache.
> 
> The blog itself is part of the user interface and I want to keep it that way.
> 
> - Dave

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Allen Gilliland <Al...@Sun.COM>]

comments inline ...

Dave Johnson wrote:
> Comments below...
> 
> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
>> Matt Raible wrote:
>> > On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
>> >> Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am
>> >> still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are 
>> you
>> >> guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between 
>> the
>> >> authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?
>> >
>> > Yes, I use it all the time for that.  It's a force of habit more than
>> > anything.  If I was smart, I'd use two tabs, but after posting
>> > thousands of blog entries, habits form. ;-)
> 
> We definitely got a very good reaction when we introduced those edit
> links. They are very convenient. It's easy to browse old entries and
> edit them when you find problems. You might arrive at an old entry
> after browing somebody else's blog and finding a link back to your
> blog, or after doing a google search or recieving a comment
> notification -- it's very convenient to be able to simply click the
> edit link to started editing.
> 
> And there are other convenient things we could do like showing an
> unapproved comment count for each entry and a link to the entry's
> comment management page.

I can see all of those being useful.


> 
> 
>> That was basically what I was thinking but couldn't articulate it for
>> some reason.  It does seem more to me like this is a feature that some
>> people may be used to because it's there, not because there is a real
>> need for it.
> 
> It's not just for preview. I use the edit link to go from old entries
> to the edit interface and I used the in-page editor-menu to access the
> bookmarks, settings, settings and other pages in the interface. I
> also use the toggle-linkback links to change visibility of linkbacks.
> Those things are a daily part of my Roller usage and I really do not
> want to see them go away.

I still think that's semi-strange since you have to already be logged in 
for this to work, but okay.


> 
> We've already made the caching of logged-in pages optional; doesn't
> that solve the problem that you are concerned about.

it's not just the cache size.  it's additional complexity in the code, 
models, and macros, it's extra caching, and there are some security 
implications.


> 
> 
>> I can see a reason why you might publish and entry and go immediately to
>> your blog page to take a final look at it, then decide you need to make
>> an edit, but aside from the past entry or 2 i don't see why you would
>> first login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your weblog
>> so that you can edit an entry that is multiple days/months old.  Or why
>> you would login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your
>> blog so that you can use the "Website:Settings" link there instead of
>> just using the link on the main menu page of the authoring interface.
> 
> I spend time browing my blog, tweaking the them and moving back
> and forth between the editor interface and my blog. I'd like be able to
> do more of that not less.

fair enough.


> 
> 
>> In any case, as an alternative I would probably propose that instead of
>> linking back and forth between the fully published weblog pages and the
>> authoring interface that we instead expand the capabilities of the
>> preview servlet to meet this need instead.  The preview servlet seems
>> like the ideal venue for this exact situation and can offer *way* more
>> benefits since we can do things with the preview servlet which we
>> wouldn't be able to do on the real pages.
>>
>> For example, perhaps the preview servlet should render draft entries so
>> that the weblog author can see how their entry will fit in with the
>> entire rendered page, rather than using the fairly simple entry preview
>> mode that we have now?  This way you can get a true preview of the way
>> the entry will look, but without having to publish it first.  Also,
>> maybe we can find a way to setup the preview servlet so that it can
>> render using unsaved template changes as well.  That would be extremely
>> beneficial since you would be able to work on templates without having
>> to affect how your rendered blog looks.  And on and on.
> 
> Yes! Absolutely. We should rip out the old preview feature and provide
> a real preview that shows the blog entry as it will appear on the
> blog.

I agree, but I don't think we need to rip out the current preview, right 
now it's basically the same thing as the page servlet with a few 
changes.  I think we just need to build on it.


> 
> I think there are a lot of cool UI things we can do by knowing the
> logged in state of the user when we render the blog so I strongly
> object to removing that ability from the page models.
> We need to make the UI easier to use, so let's not short-change users
> just to save a little space in the cache.

I'm not sure that exposing the login state of users to template writers 
is necessarily a good thing, namely because of the security 
implications, but obviously you need to do something to know when to add 
the edit links.


> 
> The blog itself is part of the user interface and I want to keep it that 
> way.

This is what I would most strongly disagree with.  I think you just 
believe that because they are both packaged together in the same webapp, 
but from a conceptual point of view I think the process of authoring 
content is not at all part of content delivery.

So no worries then, we won't change anything about the inline edit 
links.  I just wanted to offer it up as a suggestion.

-- Allen


> 
> - Dave

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com>]

Comments below...

On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> Matt Raible wrote:
> > On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> >> Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am
> >> still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are you
> >> guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between the
> >> authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?
> >
> > Yes, I use it all the time for that.  It's a force of habit more than
> > anything.  If I was smart, I'd use two tabs, but after posting
> > thousands of blog entries, habits form. ;-)

We definitely got a very good reaction when we introduced those edit
links. They are very convenient. It's easy to browse old entries and
edit them when you find problems. You might arrive at an old entry
after browing somebody else's blog and finding a link back to your
blog, or after doing a google search or recieving a comment
notification -- it's very convenient to be able to simply click the
edit link to started editing.

And there are other convenient things we could do like showing an
unapproved comment count for each entry and a link to the entry's
comment management page.


> That was basically what I was thinking but couldn't articulate it for
> some reason.  It does seem more to me like this is a feature that some
> people may be used to because it's there, not because there is a real
> need for it.

It's not just for preview. I use the edit link to go from old entries
to the edit interface and I used the in-page editor-menu to access the
 bookmarks, settings, settings and other pages in the interface. I
also use the toggle-linkback links to change visibility of linkbacks.
Those things are a daily part of my Roller usage and I really do not
want to see them go away.

We've already made the caching of logged-in pages optional; doesn't
that solve the problem that you are concerned about.


> I can see a reason why you might publish and entry and go immediately to
> your blog page to take a final look at it, then decide you need to make
> an edit, but aside from the past entry or 2 i don't see why you would
> first login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your weblog
> so that you can edit an entry that is multiple days/months old.  Or why
> you would login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your
> blog so that you can use the "Website:Settings" link there instead of
> just using the link on the main menu page of the authoring interface.

I spend time browing my blog, tweaking the them and moving back
and forth between the editor interface and my blog. I'd like be able to
do more of that not less.


> In any case, as an alternative I would probably propose that instead of
> linking back and forth between the fully published weblog pages and the
> authoring interface that we instead expand the capabilities of the
> preview servlet to meet this need instead.  The preview servlet seems
> like the ideal venue for this exact situation and can offer *way* more
> benefits since we can do things with the preview servlet which we
> wouldn't be able to do on the real pages.
>
> For example, perhaps the preview servlet should render draft entries so
> that the weblog author can see how their entry will fit in with the
> entire rendered page, rather than using the fairly simple entry preview
> mode that we have now?  This way you can get a true preview of the way
> the entry will look, but without having to publish it first.  Also,
> maybe we can find a way to setup the preview servlet so that it can
> render using unsaved template changes as well.  That would be extremely
> beneficial since you would be able to work on templates without having
> to affect how your rendered blog looks.  And on and on.

Yes! Absolutely. We should rip out the old preview feature and provide
a real preview that shows the blog entry as it will appear on the
blog.

I think there are a lot of cool UI things we can do by knowing the
logged in state of the user when we render the blog so I strongly
object to removing that ability from the page models.
We need to make the UI easier to use, so let's not short-change users
just to save a little space in the cache.

The blog itself is part of the user interface and I want to keep it that way.

- Dave

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>]

comments below ...

Matt Raible wrote:
> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
>> Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am
>> still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are you
>> guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between the
>> authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?
> 
> Yes, I use it all the time for that.  It's a force of habit more than
> anything.  If I was smart, I'd use two tabs, but after posting
> thousands of blog entries, habits form. ;-)

That was basically what I was thinking but couldn't articulate it for 
some reason.  It does seem more to me like this is a feature that some 
people may be used to because it's there, not because there is a real 
need for it.

And just so that we are not misunderstood, I am not just objecting to 
this feature because I don't happen to use it.  I am really just trying 
to offer an objective question of ... is this feature really the best 
way to accomplish the problem it is trying to solve?  more specifically, 
do these edit links on the rendered weblog pages really serve as the 
right way to work on weblog authoring while having a chance to get a 
full view of the changes?  it seems that the only benefit these links 
offer over their counterparts in the authoring interface is that they 
allow you to see the rendered weblog at the same time, and I fully admit 
that can be beneficial at times.

I can see a reason why you might publish and entry and go immediately to 
your blog page to take a final look at it, then decide you need to make 
an edit, but aside from the past entry or 2 i don't see why you would 
first login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your weblog 
so that you can edit an entry that is multiple days/months old.  Or why 
you would login to the authoring interface and then navigate to your 
blog so that you can use the "Website:Settings" link there instead of 
just using the link on the main menu page of the authoring interface.

In any case, as an alternative I would probably propose that instead of 
linking back and forth between the fully published weblog pages and the 
authoring interface that we instead expand the capabilities of the 
preview servlet to meet this need instead.  The preview servlet seems 
like the ideal venue for this exact situation and can offer *way* more 
benefits since we can do things with the preview servlet which we 
wouldn't be able to do on the real pages.

For example, perhaps the preview servlet should render draft entries so 
that the weblog author can see how their entry will fit in with the 
entire rendered page, rather than using the fairly simple entry preview 
mode that we have now?  This way you can get a true preview of the way 
the entry will look, but without having to publish it first.  Also, 
maybe we can find a way to setup the preview servlet so that it can 
render using unsaved template changes as well.  That would be extremely 
beneficial since you would be able to work on templates without having 
to affect how your rendered blog looks.  And on and on.

My goal is not to rip out a valid feature, it's more to question whether 
that feature is really appropriate and if it can be done in a better way.

-- Allen


> 
> Matt
> 
>>
>> I think my biggest hang-up is that I have never heard of a content
>> publishing system that actually ties it's rendered content together with
>> it's publishing interface.  It seems strange to me that rendered content
>> (static content) should try and have a reference back to the publishing
>> system.
>>
>> anyways ...
>>
>> -- Allen
>>
>>
>> Matt Raible wrote:
>> > I agree with Dave, -1 on removing Edit links from posts when logged in
>> > as an author.
>> >
>> > Matt
>> >
>> > On 6/29/06, Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> -1 on removing edit links and in-line menu.
>> >>
>> >> I use them many times a day and conside them extremely useful.
>> >>
>> >> - Dave
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
>> >> > I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on
>> >> entries is
>> >> > the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor
>> >> menu to
>> >> > be a bit out of context.
>> >> >
>> >> > The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, 
>> however it
>> >> > makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring
>> >> > interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little 
>> menu
>> >> > like that being on the main menu page.
>> >> >
>> >> > I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog 
>> page to
>> >> > be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the
>> >> > authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog 
>> pages are
>> >> > a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is
>> >> > basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied
>> >> together.
>> >> >
>> >> > -- Allen
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Martin Giljohann wrote:
>> >> > > I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of
>> >> view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > However I disagree with the general idea of not considering
>> >> authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the
>> >> navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut
>> >> for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This
>> >> is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than
>> >> speeding up the caching.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Regards
>> >> > > Martin
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Allen Gilliland wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it
>> >> was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would
>> >> anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that
>> >> we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are 
>> many ...
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process
>> >> to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the
>> >> weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic
>> >> that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation
>> >> which could all be removed.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a
>> >> weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit
>> >> rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their
>> >> work their.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the
>> >> weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these
>> >> pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead
>> >> than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform
>> >> any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number
>> >> of models and macros.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs
>> >> to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages
>> >> separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly
>> >> significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature
>> >> which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to
>> >> simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Thoughts?  Opinions?
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> -- Allen
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com>]

On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am
> still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are you
> guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between the
> authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?

Yes, I use it all the time for that.  It's a force of habit more than
anything.  If I was smart, I'd use two tabs, but after posting
thousands of blog entries, habits form. ;-)

Matt

>
> I think my biggest hang-up is that I have never heard of a content
> publishing system that actually ties it's rendered content together with
> it's publishing interface.  It seems strange to me that rendered content
> (static content) should try and have a reference back to the publishing
> system.
>
> anyways ...
>
> -- Allen
>
>
> Matt Raible wrote:
> > I agree with Dave, -1 on removing Edit links from posts when logged in
> > as an author.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > On 6/29/06, Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> -1 on removing edit links and in-line menu.
> >>
> >> I use them many times a day and conside them extremely useful.
> >>
> >> - Dave
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> >> > I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on
> >> entries is
> >> > the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor
> >> menu to
> >> > be a bit out of context.
> >> >
> >> > The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, however it
> >> > makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring
> >> > interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little menu
> >> > like that being on the main menu page.
> >> >
> >> > I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog page to
> >> > be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the
> >> > authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog pages are
> >> > a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is
> >> > basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied
> >> together.
> >> >
> >> > -- Allen
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Martin Giljohann wrote:
> >> > > I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of
> >> view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
> >> > >
> >> > > However I disagree with the general idea of not considering
> >> authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the
> >> navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut
> >> for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This
> >> is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than
> >> speeding up the caching.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards
> >> > > Martin
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Allen Gilliland wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it
> >> was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would
> >> anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that
> >> we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process
> >> to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the
> >> weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic
> >> that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation
> >> which could all be removed.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a
> >> weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit
> >> rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their
> >> work their.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the
> >> weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these
> >> pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead
> >> than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform
> >> any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number
> >> of models and macros.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs
> >> to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages
> >> separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly
> >> significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature
> >> which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to
> >> simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Thoughts?  Opinions?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> -- Allen
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>]

Hopefully we'll hear from a wider set of people about this, but I am 
still wondering what the use case is for these edit links.  How are you 
guys actually using them?  You actually move back and forth between the 
authoring interface and your rendered weblog to edit entries?

I think my biggest hang-up is that I have never heard of a content 
publishing system that actually ties it's rendered content together with 
it's publishing interface.  It seems strange to me that rendered content 
(static content) should try and have a reference back to the publishing 
system.

anyways ...

-- Allen


Matt Raible wrote:
> I agree with Dave, -1 on removing Edit links from posts when logged in
> as an author.
> 
> Matt
> 
> On 6/29/06, Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> -1 on removing edit links and in-line menu.
>>
>> I use them many times a day and conside them extremely useful.
>>
>> - Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
>> > I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on 
>> entries is
>> > the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor 
>> menu to
>> > be a bit out of context.
>> >
>> > The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, however it
>> > makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring
>> > interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little menu
>> > like that being on the main menu page.
>> >
>> > I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog page to
>> > be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the
>> > authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog pages are
>> > a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is
>> > basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied 
>> together.
>> >
>> > -- Allen
>> >
>> >
>> > Martin Giljohann wrote:
>> > > I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of 
>> view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
>> > >
>> > > However I disagree with the general idea of not considering 
>> authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the 
>> navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut 
>> for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This 
>> is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than 
>> speeding up the caching.
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > Martin
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Allen Gilliland wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it 
>> was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would 
>> anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that 
>> we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
>> > >>
>> > >> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process 
>> to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the 
>> weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic 
>> that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation 
>> which could all be removed.
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a 
>> weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit 
>> rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their 
>> work their.
>> > >>
>> > >> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the 
>> weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these 
>> pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
>> > >>
>> > >> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
>> > >>
>> > >> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead 
>> than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
>> > >>
>> > >> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform 
>> any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number 
>> of models and macros.
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs 
>> to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages 
>> separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly 
>> significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
>> > >>
>> > >> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature 
>> which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to 
>> simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
>> > >>
>> > >> Thoughts?  Opinions?
>> > >>
>> > >> -- Allen
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com>]

I agree with Dave, -1 on removing Edit links from posts when logged in
as an author.

Matt

On 6/29/06, Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -1 on removing edit links and in-line menu.
>
> I use them many times a day and conside them extremely useful.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
> On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> > I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on entries is
> > the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor menu to
> > be a bit out of context.
> >
> > The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, however it
> > makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring
> > interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little menu
> > like that being on the main menu page.
> >
> > I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog page to
> > be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the
> > authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog pages are
> > a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is
> > basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied together.
> >
> > -- Allen
> >
> >
> > Martin Giljohann wrote:
> > > I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
> > >
> > > However I disagree with the general idea of not considering authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than speeding up the caching.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > > Allen Gilliland wrote:
> > >
> > >> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
> > >>
> > >> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation which could all be removed.
> > >>
> > >> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their work their.
> > >>
> > >> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
> > >>
> > >> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
> > >>
> > >> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
> > >>
> > >> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number of models and macros.
> > >>
> > >> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
> > >>
> > >> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
> > >>
> > >> Thoughts?  Opinions?
> > >>
> > >> -- Allen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Dave Johnson <sn...@gmail.com>]

-1 on removing edit links and in-line menu.

I use them many times a day and conside them extremely useful.

- Dave



On 6/29/06, Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com> wrote:
> I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on entries is
> the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor menu to
> be a bit out of context.
>
> The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, however it
> makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring
> interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little menu
> like that being on the main menu page.
>
> I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog page to
> be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the
> authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog pages are
> a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is
> basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied together.
>
> -- Allen
>
>
> Martin Giljohann wrote:
> > I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
> >
> > However I disagree with the general idea of not considering authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than speeding up the caching.
> >
> > Regards
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > Allen Gilliland wrote:
> >
> >> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
> >>
> >> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation which could all be removed.
> >>
> >> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their work their.
> >>
> >> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
> >>
> >> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
> >>
> >> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
> >>
> >> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number of models and macros.
> >>
> >> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
> >>
> >> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?  Opinions?
> >>
> >> -- Allen
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: remove inline edit links on weblog pages?

[Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>]

I would agree with your point that the little "edit" links on entries is 
the less useful element, but I still consider that little editor menu to 
be a bit out of context.

The menu itself is nice and I suggest we continue using it, however it 
makes way more sense to me for that to be part of the authoring 
interface rather than on *all* weblog pages.  I can see a little menu 
like that being on the main menu page.

I am also yet to understand why it makes any sense for a weblog page to 
be knowledgeable about the login status of a user.  You login to the 
authoring interface, not a weblog.  To me the rendered weblog pages are 
a completely separate system from the authoring system (which is 
basically the case in the code as well) and they shouldn't be tied together.

-- Allen


Martin Giljohann wrote:
> I like the idea of simplifying the blog UIs and from my point of view the edit link is somewhat unnecessary.
> 
> However I disagree with the general idea of not considering authorization for the blog templates, because I regard e.g. the navigation menu as being pretty useful in terms of having a shortcut for the author for posting new entries and manage the settings. This is a usability feature which I would personally weight higher than speeding up the caching.
> 
> Regards
> Martin
> 
> 
> Allen Gilliland wrote:
> 
>> I know I have brought this up before and I don't remember how it was received, but in any case I'm going to bring it up again.  Would anyone be opposed to the idea of removing the set of edit links that we embed into weblog pages?  I think the reasons to do this are many ...
>>
>> 1. It would *significantly* simplify the page rendering process to not have to deal the issue of rendering things differently if the weblog owner is logged in.  I believe there is a fair amount of logic that goes into the models/macros/rendering to deal with this situation which could all be removed.
>>
>> 2. I consider this feature minimally useful.  I don't see why a weblog author would browser their site to look for things to edit rather than just logging into the "editing" interface and doing their work their.
>>
>> 3. This feature is only ever of benefit to a single person, the weblog author.  We add a fair amount of extra logic just so that these pages can be rendered to benefit a single person :/
>>
>> 4. This would never work in a statically rendered site.
>>
>> As far as I am concerned this feature requires way more overhead than it's worth.  If we rip it out we simplify a number of things ...
>>
>> 1. we can remove all elements of models and macros which perform any logic based on a users login status.  this would simplify a number of models and macros.
>>
>> 2. we can simplify our caching because the cache no longer needs to know if the user is logged in or not and render/cache those pages separately.  this reduces the size of the cache (possibly significantly on large sites) and eliminates unnecessary redundancy.
>>
>> So, my opinion is pretty obvious.  I think this is a feature which can safely be removed and will do some very good things to simplify a number of aspects of weblog rendering.
>>
>> Thoughts?  Opinions?
>>
>> -- Allen
>>
>>
> 
>