Rollie's design review last week was very fruitful. Most of the issues resulting from it have been ticketed. Many are fairly trivial look-and-feel issues; to save your inboxes I invite you to investigate Trac and check the timeline ( http://projects.opengeo.org/CAPRA/timeline ) to see updates on those. However, there is a significant change recommended to the map composition and metadata workflows that's covered by these tickets. The motivation behind these changes is that the currently implemented workflow was designed before the Map Information Page was available as the main gateway to understanding a map. Now, we ought to integrate the composer and the info pages: * http://projects.opengeo.org/CAPRA/ticket/595 * http://projects.opengeo.org/CAPRA/ticket/596 * http://projects.opengeo.org/CAPRA/ticket/595 <http://projects.opengeo.org/CAPRA/ticket/595>To summarize: The "About" accordian tab in the composer should be removed. A top bar showing the map title prominently and with a link to the info page should replace it. The Save workflow should bring up a dialog that will let people add metadata to the map. The map info page should have an "Edit Metadata" link to a web form for metadata editing (similar to the workflow for editing a layer's metadata). Additional details are in those tickets. ------------------------- Questions: * Any thoughts on implementation of these before we get to it? Any objections to it on technical grounds? * I think I'm comfortable enough with the code base here to implement many of these changes, but I was wondering if anybody would be interested in collaborating. Basically, I work on it in a branch in my own fork, or I could make it a branch in the geonode origin repo. Which is preferable? -- Sebastian Benthall OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
On 07/07/2010 01:22 PM, Sebastian Benthall wrote: > * Any thoughts on implementation of these before we get to it? Any > objections to it on technical grounds? not really, on either count. this sounds pretty cosmetic so I don't a lot of "technical grounds" involved. maybe I am being short-sighted though. > * I think I'm comfortable enough with the code base here to implement > many of these changes, but I was wondering if anybody would be > interested in collaborating. Basically, I work on it in a branch in > my own fork, or I could make it a branch in the geonode origin repo. > Which is preferable? I'd like to avoid deleting branches from GeoNode/geonode (because deleting stuff is complicated in a distributed system, as well as my own sense of aesthetics (which dictates that branches in the main repository correspond to major release lines of the project)). So, I'd prefer to see temporary branches for work like this in a forked repository. -- David Winslow OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org/