Use case: symmetrically related glossary definitions
| Project: | Relationship |
| Version: | HEAD |
| Component: | Miscellaneous |
| Category: | feature request |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | active |
Jump to:
I appreciate the hard work you have put into this module, dman. Please keep it up!
In another discussion, you expressed a desire to understand how some of us intend to use the relationship module. Here is a brief sketch of my intention.
I maintain a for-profit glossary-based web site which currently contains 1,800 definitions. We expect to reach 5,000 by the end of April. So I am interested in user interfaces that are relatively painless, particularly if I need to retroactively iterate over the glossary.
In particular, I anticipate identifying symmetric relationships between glossary definitions. Viz., definition A shows a hyperlink to definition B, and vice versa.
Possible interface (inspired by http://www.tadalist.com):
This content type is related to:
- Link to definition B with a "remove" link or widget
- Textfield in which to type an auto-completed node title, followed by an "Add" button
For bulk processing, it may be helpful to redirect the user to the next node in the processing queue to save some navigation time.
These are my thoughts off the top of my head. I share them because you expressed an interest, and because I see great potential in this module.
Nic Ivy
#1
Interesting.
I'm currently saving relationships (so far) as belonging to the node it was applied to and the programatically deducing the inverse at lookup, (so it can't actually be deleted from the target term) . This approach made sense for convoluted deductions, but is probably not appropriate for 1-1 links like inverses.
It means I'll have to capture deletions however, and that's a bit tricky.
Currently depends on the datastore parameters (propogate implications on save or on retrieve) but I guess this behaviour could be part of the characteristic of the term itself.
I'm thinking about this.
A 'save and next' button for reviewing pages sounds worthwhile. In 4.7 it'll be pretty easy with the forms API. A module could probably be made to do just that, in 4.6 also, maybe using the 'destination' parameter.
It's altogether distinct from relationships. I haven't messed with the 'process queue' at all, I guess that's the thing that gives the little * next to the items in the admin/content list. I haven't done any workflow, I'll see how that works.
Thanks for the input. Ae you going 4.6 or 4.7? I'm trying to migrate at the moment.
.dan.
#2
I agree--the "save and next" button is a separate issue.
My current efforts are with 4.7.