Re: Revision Marks (was) Re: Commit (HEAD): SDW: Metadata

From: Martin Sevior (
Date: Fri May 17 2002 - 18:50:54 EDT

  • Next message: Paul Rohr: "local vs. sequenced revisions"

    On Fri, 17 May 2002, Tomas Frydrych wrote:

    > Hi Martin and Paul,
    > > > - RMS adds "GNU/" to all occurrences of "Linux", and
    > > > - ESR goes back through and deletes them.
    > > >
    > > > At edit time, all of the deleted content exists inside the piece
    > > > table, but by design none of it gets exported to the file format.
    > > > Off the cuff, I don't see a trivial robust change to the file format
    > > > which will handle this gracefully.
    > ...
    > > > For revision marks to work well, we need to handle all three of the
    > > > following style of changes: insert, change, and delete. The first
    > > > is easy, the last is hard, and the second can be expressed as a
    > > > combination of the other two.
    > >
    > > I was thinking we could use our change records as used by the undo
    > > code for this. They would needed to be XML-ized but we should do
    > > something like this anyway to display undo "tooltips". ie Put mouse
    > > over the undo button and see the last five operations.
    > I think you are going the wrong way about this guys. The deletion
    > of text in revision mode should not be thought of as deteletion from
    > the piecetable, but merely as a formatting change. Text deleted in
    > revision mode is not deleted, merely marked with an attribute 'so
    > and so thought this should be deleted'. Only when the document is
    > back in the normal mode and the user is accepting a delete-type
    > revision the marker 'this should be deleted' gets translated into a
    > real delete operation.

    Great! Yes, your ideas make much more sense and are much easier to
    implement. Please continue your design :-)

    > This is simple and requires just adding the extra couple of
    > attributes to indicated changes made in revision mode. We then
    > jsut need to remap the deletion operations when you enter
    > revisions mode to simple formatting changes; no need to modify
    > the PT (and the great thing is that the Undo will automatically work,
    > since it already handles formatting changes). Then we need to add
    > decent user interface + some trickery to the layout classes to
    > hide/unhide the text marked as revised depending on what the user
    > wants to see, and that should be pretty much it.

    This is really, really great! I can't wait to drink that beer from Miguel



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 17 2002 - 18:54:48 EDT