* [Wish List 630] Template Design Preview

[KFN]

Tatewise, I get what you are saying!

As far as Tools > Preferences > Sources > Generic Source Formats I stopped thinking in terms of "Generic" Sources because I was under the impression that it was not worth changing them or that I was not able to change them! But I've amended my statement:

"Test potential template designs (i.e. custom modifications to all source template types, including generic templates) against a set of record instances including those that contain Standard GEDCOM based tags as well as those based on "custom tags" from a specified project, before adding the template to the project!”

If you can change the words to better use known CP terminology for these concepts, please feel free to adjust this or not use it at all!

[AdrianBruce]

... "Test potential template designs (i.e. custom modifications to all source template types, including generic templates) ...

Err - what are generic templates? Sources are either Generic or Templated.

If by "generic templates" you are referring to the formats for Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote for Generic Sources as accessed via Tools > Preferences > Sources > Generic Source Formats..., then I have (almost) zero intention of asking for them to be covered in this proposal.

Nobody has asked for them to be covered and I am trying to come up with a specification that is specific and compact for a (hopefully) small item of work. Not a dissertation on an as yet uncharted part of GEDCOM, interesting though that might be for myself.

What I intend to do is just present the topic to Calico Pie saying that if they want to provide a facility to preview those formats for Generic Sources, then they are welcome to do so but I'm not asking for it. It's not part of my role to ensure that the same facilities are consistently provided across the board in FH. I'm only asking for a preview for templated sources. (As I indicated in earlier posts, I have a fear that the most sophisticated formats for templated sources are used only by a handful of people. And how many people even know that Tools > Preferences > Sources > Generic Source Formats... allows customisation of the formats beyond setting check-boxes?)

... against a set of record instances including those that contain Standard GEDCOM based tags as well as those based on "custom tags" from a specified project, before adding the template to the project!” ...

That requirement doesn't work for me. The whole point of previewing formats for templated sources is that the templates can be entirely new formats with totally new Fields, which therefore can't be found in the project. (Which possibly hasn't even been specified yet). In extremis, there are no Source Records (and therefore no citations) in any project on the user's machine. In my view, I have to suggest another method of supplying preview data if things look less than obvious. Either that or allow the possibility of it going into the too-difficult box.

[KFN]

Adrian,

Based on your analysis, Forget I even commented! “Generic Formats” and GEDCOM based data is all I concerned with, therefore I’m out!

[AdrianBruce]

Revised version, attempting to address previous comments... Changes are underlined. I hope.

Summary of Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote, using user-specified sample values, without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

Background
The "proper" way of updating Source Template Definitions is via Tools / Source Template Definitions...

The Source Template Definition Editor then gives access to the list of Fields, and their Types. Those are then concatenated, along with optional fixed text, into the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote. The Fields can be adjusted with styles, qualifiers, etc.

Issue
The Source Template Definition Editor only shows the "parameters" - it does not show any sample values. Many people find it much easier to assess the usefulness of their new formats if they can see sample values. Currently, that requires adding the revised Source Template Definition to a project and then creating a Prepared Citation against the new Source Template.

Any desired changes then have to be reflected back into the Source Template Definition Editor (with consequent potential for missing desired changes) and the process repeated.

Other methods are possible, such as editing the Source Template directly, but sometimes these methods store up unseen issues.

Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the resulting formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

The resulting formats should contain Field-appropriate sample data values (i.e. not generic "XXXX" strings unless those are explicitly entered by the user).

The resulting formats must use any currently specified styles and qualifiers, etc.

It should be possible to input the sample data values as part of the process of using the Source Template Definition Editor.

The new facility should provide a means of keeping the sample data values for a template definition from one use of the Source Template Definition Editor to the next use for the same template definition.

It should be possible for the user to specify multiple sets of sample values for a single template - this facility is required to cope with conditional formatting specified between angle brackets (for instance).

The sets of sample values should be identified by the Template Name, Collection and a means of distinguishing between the multiple sets of sample values for that template.

Constraints

• It must be possible to use this new preview facility without any Source Records in any current project.
• It must be possible to use this new preview facility to create completely new Fields for the template in question.
• It is possible to use GEDCOM standard fields such as %SOUR.AUTH% in the format templates defined by the Source Template Definition Editor. It is unclear whether such items should be left in the preview as the text "%SOUR.AUTH%" or whether sample values can be specified for those items - the latter would be preferable.

Scope
The scope of this request is the Source Template Definition Editor as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Source Templates (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

It also excludes direct updates of the Record Title, Footnote, Short Footnote and Bibliography Formats on the property box for the Source Template record type in a project.

If Calico Pie wish to extend the Preview Function to either of those areas, they are welcome to, but this change only requests that the facility be provided for the Source Template Definition Editor.

[ColeValleyGirl]

A couple of comments:

Constraints
...
It is possible to use GEDCOM standard fields such as %SOUR.AUTH% in the format templates defined by the Source Template Definition Editor. It is unclear whether such items should be left in the preview as the text "%SOUR.AUTH%" or whether sample values can be specified for those items - the latter would be preferable.
[/list]

I'd prefer that sample values could definitely be specified here as well -- mixing in e.g. %SOUR.AUTH% with 'real text' will make it harder to assess whether something 'looks right' because the eye will hiccup when it sees code where it shouldn't be. Especially as you need to handle the situation where a piece of such data is missing deliberately in the sample.

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

In functionality terms, I think it would be neater if this was in scope, although in the nature of Generic Sourvces, it would likely be very rarely used, but if CP don't include it there's a way around it for users of Generic sources. . Just create a custom Source Template called Generic which doesn't have any metafields (so any source created will -- as far as I can tell -- be a pure generic one . As long as sample values can be included for GEDCOM standard fields (as above) then the preview process will work for this Generic template. The template need not be used -- the formats can be copied to the Tools > Preferences > Sources > Generic Source Formats when ready.

[tatewise]

I agree with Helen's comments.

Without specifying to CP how to implement this feature, my vision is that the Template Review process could be based on the Citation Window.

Typically that window displays all the fields needed by the format templates, including standard GEDCOM fields.
If not, then the Citation Window menu options Show Source Record in Property Box and Show Citation in Property Box (All tab) allow access to all the standard GEDCOM fields.

Many of the other Citation Window menu options would be useful such as Show Formats in Side Panel.

The Citation Window displays the Source Record Title in the top border and the Footnote, Short Footnote, and Bibliography on the right via the Show Side Panel button, so they can be easily reviewed.

The sample data sets may be held in GEDCOM mini-structures involving a Source record and prepared Citation.

IMO the above strategy would reuse much of the existing code for presenting the Citation Window, etc.
It solves the problem of where to save sample data for standard GEDCOM fields.
It needs minimal change to Format editor dialogues, i.e. add a Review button with a choice of sample data sets.

[AdrianBruce]

Constraints
... It is possible to use GEDCOM standard fields such as %SOUR.AUTH% in the format templates defined by the Source Template Definition Editor. It is unclear whether such items should be left in the preview as the text "%SOUR.AUTH%" or whether sample values can be specified for those items - the latter would be preferable.

I'd prefer that sample values could definitely be specified here as well -- mixing in e.g. %SOUR.AUTH% with 'real text' will make it harder to assess whether something 'looks right' because the eye will hiccup when it sees code where it shouldn't be. ...

Yes, I think you're right.

...

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

In functionality terms, I think it would be neater if this was in scope, ...

While I think you're right, I'm happy to leave it to CP to decide whether the benefit of those extra items outweighs the necessary effort.

... Without specifying to CP how to implement this feature, my vision is that the Template Review process could be based on the Citation Window. ...

Certainly, that scenario was playing in my head.

[AdrianBruce]

Further revised version, attempting to address previous comments... Changes are underlined. I hope. I have attempted to specify how I envisage handling preview values for GEDCOM etc stuff like %SOUR.AUTH% but am concerned I might not have the right terminology and also am I missing something for more complex stuff???

Summary of Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote, using user-specified sample values, without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

Background
The "proper" way of updating Source Template Definitions is via Tools / Source Template Definitions...

The Source Template Definition Editor then gives access to the list of Fields, and their Types. Those are then concatenated, along with optional fixed text, into the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote. The Fields can be adjusted with styles, qualifiers, etc.

Issue
The Source Template Definition Editor only shows the "parameters" - it does not show any sample values. Many people find it much easier to assess the usefulness of their new formats if they can see sample values. Currently, that requires adding the revised Source Template Definition to a project and then creating a Prepared Citation against the new Source Template.

Any desired changes then have to be reflected back into the Source Template Definition Editor (with consequent potential for missing desired changes) and the process repeated.

Other methods are possible, such as editing the Source Template directly, but sometimes these methods store up unseen issues.

Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the resulting formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

The resulting formats should contain Field-appropriate sample data values (i.e. not generic "XXXX" strings unless those are explicitly entered by the user).

The resulting formats must use any currently specified styles and qualifiers, etc.

It must be possible to input the sample data values as part of the process of using the Source Template Definition Editor.

The new facility must provide a means of keeping the sample data values for a template definition from one use of the Source Template Definition Editor to the next use for the same template definition.

It should be possible for the user to specify multiple sets of sample values for a single template - this facility is required to cope with conditional formatting specified between angle brackets (for instance).

The sets of sample values should be identified by the Template Name, Collection and a means of distinguishing between the multiple sets of sample values for that template.

Constraints

• It must be possible to use this new preview facility without any Source Records in any current project.
• It must be possible to use this new preview facility to create completely new Fields for the template in question.
• It is possible to use GEDCOM standard fields such as %SOUR.AUTH% in the format templates defined by the Source Template Definition Editor. It must be possible to specify sample values for this type of item, as leaving them in the preview as the text "%SOUR.AUTH%" (say) will be too disruptive to assess the fitness of the proposed formats. Sample values could be entered for each GEDCOM item etc as a whole, rather than attempting to break them down, e.g. enter "%SOUR.AUTH%" = "Cheshire Regiment".

Scope
The scope of this request is the Source Template Definition Editor as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Source Templates (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

It also excludes direct updates of the Record Title, Footnote, Short Footnote and Bibliography Formats on the property box for the Source Template record type in a project.

If Calico Pie wish to extend the Preview Function to either of those areas, they are welcome to, but this change only requests that the facility be provided for the Source Template Definition Editor.

[tatewise]

... Sample values could be entered for each GEDCOM item etc as a whole, rather than attempting to break them down, e.g. enter "%SOUR.AUTH%" = "Cheshire Regiment".

Sorry Adrian, but I don't understand what you are trying to specify.
What does 'as a whole' versus 'break them down' mean?
Why does anything need to be said about what could be entered?

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

I would prefer it said 'The scope of this request may also include the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).'

[AdrianBruce]

... Sample values could be entered for each GEDCOM item etc as a whole, rather than attempting to break them down, e.g. enter "%SOUR.AUTH%" = "Cheshire Regiment".

Sorry Adrian, but I don't understand what you are trying to specify.
What does 'as a whole' versus 'break them down' mean?

OK - this is where I've gone past the limit of my overall understanding, so any help would be welcome.

"%SOUR.AUTH%" is the simple case - it's just a single, independent item.

But is it possible, at this point, to combine two or more GEDCOM items via an expression / function such as TextIf?

It makes little sense to me to start trying to TextIf sample values so I was trying to get towards the idea of the overall TextIf (or whatever) conglomeration to have one sample value, rather than the individual parts within the TextIf to have sample values - because the overall TextIf would still be a fixed sample. But my terminology is grossly inadequate I fear.

Why does anything need to be said about what could be entered?

"Could" is just the next level down from "must" and "should". It's what could be done to enter the sample values but I'm not wedded to it.

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

I would prefer it said 'The scope of this request may also include the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).'

Sorry but "The scope of this request may also include" doesn't work for me. If that wording were used, I would ask, just what is the scope? I would prefer to make a definite statement about the scope and allow CP to extend the scope if it seems useful. That's clearer.

[tatewise]

Adrian, I think your logic for functions such as TextIf(...) involving standard GEDCOM values is mistaken.
The overall TextIf(...) conglomeration would never be a constant value. The whole purpose of TextIf(...) is to conditionally display different values.

TextIf(...) is another combination option similar to < angle brackets > so why treat it differently?
The user will want to enter several sample values to review the combinations regardless of whether they are Template Fields or standard GEDCOM fields. It is perfectly feasible for a function such as TextIf(...) to involve a mixture of Template Fields and standard GEDCOM fields, so your proposal makes no sense to me.

If our idea of a Citation Window is used then all the GEDCOM fields have placeholders for the sample values.
There won't be placeholders for such as TextIf(...) functions, so how would their values be entered?

[AdrianBruce]

Adrian, I think your logic for functions such as TextIf(...) involving standard GEDCOM values is mistaken. ...

Err - you could be right. I was thinking that it might be too complex to work out the value of an expression(?) and therefore easier to substitute a sample value for the whole expression. But the only variables that can go into this are the template fields or GEDCOM fields. Those need to have sample values. Everything else can be built up from them, similarly to the Citation window... I think...

Let me get my head around it a bit more...

[tatewise]

Yes, the user does not have to work out the value of a function like TextIf(...). That is what FH does.
It is just the same as the Format expressions that FH works out from field values and other component parts.
Just entering sample values into our proposed Review Citation Window will be sufficient.

Is it worth mentioning the Citation Window concept as a possible solution in the Wish List request?

[AdrianBruce]

Another revised version, attempting to address previous comments... Changes are underlined. I hope.

Summary of Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote, using user-specified sample values, without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

Background
The "proper" way of updating Source Template Definitions is via Tools / Source Template Definitions...

The Source Template Definition Editor then gives access to the list of Fields, and their Types. Those are then concatenated, along with optional fixed text, into the formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote. The Fields can be adjusted with styles, qualifiers, etc.

Issue
The Source Template Definition Editor only shows the "parameters" - it does not show any sample values. Many people find it much easier to assess the usefulness of their new formats if they can see sample values. Currently, that requires adding the revised Source Template Definition to a project and then creating a Prepared Citation against the new Source Template.

Any desired changes then have to be reflected back into the Source Template Definition Editor (with consequent potential for missing desired changes) and the process repeated.

Other methods are possible, such as editing the Source Template directly, but sometimes these methods store up unseen issues.

Proposal
The Source Template Definition Editor should be given a "preview" function that will show the resulting formats for Record Title, Bibliography, Footnote and Short Footnote without exiting the Source Template Definition Editor.

The resulting formats should contain Field-appropriate sample data values (i.e. not generic "XXXX" strings unless those are explicitly entered by the user).

The resulting formats must use any currently specified styles and qualifiers, expressions, functions, etc.

It must be possible to input the sample data values as part of the process of using the Source Template Definition Editor.

The new facility must provide a means of keeping the sample data values for a template definition from one use of the Source Template Definition Editor to the next use for the same template definition.

It should be possible for the user to specify multiple sets of sample values for a single template - this facility is required to cope with conditional formatting specified between angle brackets (for instance).

The sets of sample values should be identified by the Template Name, Collection and a means of distinguishing between the multiple sets of sample values for that template.

Constraints

• It must be possible to use this new preview facility without any Source Records in any current project.
• It must be possible to use this new preview facility to preview completely new Fields for the template in question.
• It is possible to use GEDCOM standard fields such as %SOUR.AUTH% in the format templates defined by the Source Template Definition Editor. It must be possible to specify sample values for this type of item and preview them.

Scope
The scope of this request is the Source Template Definition Editor as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Source Templates (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

For clarity, the scope of this request excludes the Generic Source Formats as accessed from Tools / Preferences / Sources / Generic Source Formats (and any other means of accessing the same facility).

It also excludes direct updates of the Record Title, Footnote, Short Footnote and Bibliography Formats on the property box for the Source Template record type in a project.

If Calico Pie wish to extend the Preview Function to either of those areas, they are welcome to, but this change only requests that the facility be provided for the Source Template Definition Editor.

Note for information - the Citation window, when showing "Formats in Side Panel", and when customised to show any relevant GEDCOM standard fields, illustrates the sort of Preview that is being requested, though the values there are from the Source Record and Citation, etc, rather than sample values.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Should the sample data be exported/imported along with a template definition?

[AdrianBruce]

Should the sample data be exported/imported along with a template definition?

Err - yes? And Cloned when the Source Template Definition is cloned?

[tatewise]

I would agree it should be retained when cloned.
I'm not so sure about when exported. Will another user necessarily use the same data values?
I suppose it would be easy for them to delete sample values either individually or an entire set.
So presumably it does no harm to include them with the export.

[Vyger]

Wish List item 630 has been created. Please vote for it to let Calico Pie know if you wish to see this feature introduced.