-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
(3/3) Annotation template feature #605
(3/3) Annotation template feature #605
Conversation
`label.category` is only set for preexisting categories, not for ones created during the current browser session.
With this patch, the frontend also knows about deleted labels, categories, scales and scale values. This makes the behavior of annotations carrying any of that deleted structure much more consistent.
Previously it already showed the editing interface for the scale of the category you got to the dialog with. It wasn't fully in edit mode yet, though, so edits could get lost.
...kend/annotation-impl/src/main/java/org/opencastproject/util/osgi/SimpleServicePublisher.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
A few questions before we (finally ...) dive in:
|
Comparing the commit history, the 3/3 branch (unterrichtsvideos:cc/master-merge-bugfixes-annotationsvorlagen---SQUASHED) was created from branch unterrichtsvideos:cc/master-merge-bugfixes---REBASED and the commit Fix missing translations, consistent language files (a6e0319), 4 non-conflicting commits were later added to the bugfixes branch. Otherwise the following 4 commits have to be added / merged to the 3/3 branch as well.
These comments were part of a quick review and parts I stumbled upon. If that's fine for you, feel free to make these changes if you agree. Feel free to make any changes in the code regarding to the goal to create the merged version.
the public meeting contains a link to test files, don't hesitate to contact us, whether these are working (they should) or need and update. |
…e-bugfixes-annotationsvorlagen---SQUASHED
This access level can be removed (this belonged to a draft course context feature which is not included in the merge)
Creates a local sort function instead of having the exact same code two times.
Got overlooked in the latest merge
…ugfixes-annotationsvorlagen---SQUASHED # Conflicts: # frontend/package.json # opencast-backend/annotation-impl/src/main/java/org/opencast/annotation/impl/persistence/ExtendedAnnotationServiceJpaImpl.java # opencast-backend/annotation-impl/src/test/java/org/opencast/annotation/impl/ExtendedAnnotationServiceJpaImplTest.java # pom.xml
For now it's always black, which works with our predefined color set. Still, it would be nice for it to work with all possible colors. This adds a todo reminder and a suggestion on how this might be achieved in the future.
…ugfixes-annotationsvorlagen---SQUASHED
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there documentation on how to use questionnaires? Might be me being blind, but I can't find any in this PR. And since users must use a template to use questionnaires, this feature is unusable if you don't know what a template must look like.
Indeed we owe a documentation for this. We will create and provide one when the merged version is finalized. Following the discussion regarding the term "questionnaire", for end users the feature is called "annotation templates", as a questionnaire is basically a "annotation-template"-based form editor for creating MCA with a pre-defined structure (which can be used e.g. to create annotation tasks for students); internally the term was not refactored It was planned that templates can be created with a "questionnaire" builder (template builder) Related project (unfinished state): Questionnaire builder |
…ugfixes-annotationsvorlagen---SQUASHED
Removes Edit, Save and Cancel buttons from questionnaire timestamps. Simple input fields do the job just as well and are easier to use.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd say this is good enough to merge. Still needs to documentation, and did not go through the entire code (it's simply too much), but as far as I can tell the annotation templates work, don't break anything and this PR even fixes some previously broken things!
We'll still want to wait on @JulianKniephoff 's opinion before merging though.
This branch builds upon the merged+ bugfixed branch from PR #603 and PR #604