Modified Content Roles Page
Document Actions
I have been working on the content roles page, adding the feature to reorder roles. I think it is currently "feature complete." I have modified the page to only use one table (not two like before). Also, there are buttons to move people up and down on the listing. Also, I have added the ability to "search" for all members in your workgroup with one click.
If there are any other features that should be included, or old bugs with the roles that we should fix at this time, please let me know. Please take a look at the page on yoda 9380. You can get to it by going to any checked out course or module and clicking on the roles tab
NOTE: at this time, I haven't finished the upgrade scripts that will allow you to view any object that was already checked out. You can try to view previously checkedout copies, but if they don't work, discard them and recheckout.
Re: Modified Content Roles Page
1. If I back up in the browser, and click "Add People" again, the person is added again! This seems to be a regression.
2. If I add somebody as an author, they are displayed in the list and table below as a new copyright holder (and vice-versa)! Maintainer seems fine.
3. If I add a new person, then unclick the X next to their new asterisked checkbox, then click the "Cancel Request" checkbox, then the "Submit Changes" button, I get a error message reading "Error Value: list.remove(x): x not in list".
4. Even stranger: if I add a new person as a maintainer, say, then when they show up in the table, select their "Author" checkbox, then select their "Cancel Request" checkbox, and finally press the "Submit Changes" button, the person is removed as a maintainer (as expected), but then added as an author, bypassing their approval! Even worse, the module can be published w/ their new author role intact.
5. If somebody just has one role, such as maintainership, for example, you can do the above, but in reverse, essentially removing them from the maintainership role w/o their approval.
6. When I tried to view a pending role request (that I was supposed to accept), I got the following error: "Error Value: list indices must be integers".
7. When I start a new module, it appears to have no new role-holders by default!
Good luck!
Re: Re: Modified Content Roles Page
Re: Re: Modified Content Roles Page
1-5,7 Fixed
6. This is a problem with old data... still working on the upgrade script
Thanks for all your input, Max!
Re: Re: Re: Modified Content Roles Page
Re: Re: Re: Re: Modified Content Roles Page
But seriously, I know I repeated some of those things after Kyle had fixed them, but then I ran into some new bugs IIRC, so they might be worth double-checking.
1. When I first get there, even before searching for anything, the "Results / None" text appears. This should only appear if I've searched.
2. When both users of a Workgroup are already role-holders in a module, clicking on the "[Select people] from this Workgroup" link produces an empty table.
3. The header of the search result table should read (IMHO): "Add as ... (what do these roles mean?)" with the "what do these roles mean?" being a link to the /help/reference/roles/ page. As we found in the usability study (http://rhaptos.org/devblog/maxwell/blogentry.2005-06-09.4204513240), the "help" link was used when users were trying to figure out how the role approval process worked, and this link didn't provide them with the information they were looking for. "Help" is too ambiguous by itself, so changing it to "what do these roles mean?" makes things clearer. "Add as ..." is also clearer than just "Roles".
4. Since Recommendation 9.3 of the usability study was never carried out (*cough*Mark*cough*), the link I made in my roles page mock-up to "How are role changes accepted?" probably didn't make much sense, and was replaced with "what do these roles mean?" (after the sentence "Role change, addition, or deletion pending acceptance."). As long as Recommendation 9.3 isn't carried out, there's probably no point in having a link after that sentence. The "what do these roles mean?" link is already there in 1-2 places.
5. I know I originally wrote "Role change, addition, or deletion pending acceptance", but I wonder if it might be better as "Role addition or deletion pending acceptance" or "Role changes pending acceptance". Are there changes that aren't additions or deletions? Is it not clear enough that italics-cum-asterisk or strike-through-cum-asterisk are additions and deletions, respectively?
6. When adjusting some roles, I got ugly "Orange Box" messages, e.g. "Author: ['mhusband'], Licensor: ['mhusband', 'mmramsey'], Maintainer: ['mhusband'][][]{'mmramsey': {'Licensor': 'add', 'Maintainer': 'del'}}".
7. I don't like the brown "changed" cells or red strike-through of removed users, but that's my job to change in CSS.
8. There's a space between an asterisked name and their comma that should be taken out.
9. There also needs to be a period at the end of the "‡" message.
Sorry that this looks like mostly complaining ... I really do think you've done a great job with it!
6 is in there just as debugging code. I'll leave it in there while I am still working on the page, but I will take it out when I'm done working on it.