quant
03-27-2007, 08:12 AM
My suggestion is to create attribute alias name or combined attribute name (consisting of Category+Name)
Reason:
at the moment, Attributes have to have unique name, and they belong to certain category. I envision that users (Kinook) create Templates for various uses, and the attributes inside these templates probably need to have some prefix to guarantee the uniqueness of Attribute name inside a given database when importing various templates.
I work on a Bibliography template, that I plan to post soon. The Bibliography is based on Bibtex (very popular among mathematicians): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BibTeX
It is plain text, can export to CSV, which can be used to import to UR. I was already able to import my whole library inside UR, and because of CSV export, am able to export it back to Bibtex format.
However, it contains attributes like Author, Year, ... which many users can use in another attribute category with different default values, ... this would mean that they wont not be able to use my template cause it would change their database.
So I decided to add a prefix, for example bib: bibAuthor, bibYear for all attributes in the Bibliography attributes category. If I'm able to add an alias name, then bibAuthor, would be called just Author, and in the forms the user would see just "Author".
Another (I think nicer and more robust) solution could be, if the attribute name is combined from it's name and category. In this case, there could be many Author attributes but each in different category, for example:
Category: Document
Attribute: Author
Category: Bibliography
Attribute: Author
The unique attributes name used to identify, search, ... are Document::Author, and Bibliography::Author, but in forms user could choose whether to use the whole name or just the name without category. This would prevent collisions if user chooses to use someones Template that uses attributes with the same name (the requirement would be to have unique attribute category name).
Profits:
I think UR is a great product, but people not used to it dont see the whole power, and it seems to me that Kinook themselves don't market it effectively :)
One installs UR, and the only templates with forms are Appointment, Contact and Task. Imports for CSV, XML, but what's this for an average user who doesnt know what XML is?
I think there should be an official Template Library with Forms, where various Contacts/Tasks/Collections/Bibliography/... could be downloaded. And if the attribute names are like explained above, it would prevent collisions if a Template has its own Attributes category. If in addition, Kinook provides import directly to some of this templates (using saved import feature, but without any user intervention), UR could be easily marketed as a Bibliography tool/ Collection tool/ ... endless possibilities
Any suggestions?
Reason:
at the moment, Attributes have to have unique name, and they belong to certain category. I envision that users (Kinook) create Templates for various uses, and the attributes inside these templates probably need to have some prefix to guarantee the uniqueness of Attribute name inside a given database when importing various templates.
I work on a Bibliography template, that I plan to post soon. The Bibliography is based on Bibtex (very popular among mathematicians): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BibTeX
It is plain text, can export to CSV, which can be used to import to UR. I was already able to import my whole library inside UR, and because of CSV export, am able to export it back to Bibtex format.
However, it contains attributes like Author, Year, ... which many users can use in another attribute category with different default values, ... this would mean that they wont not be able to use my template cause it would change their database.
So I decided to add a prefix, for example bib: bibAuthor, bibYear for all attributes in the Bibliography attributes category. If I'm able to add an alias name, then bibAuthor, would be called just Author, and in the forms the user would see just "Author".
Another (I think nicer and more robust) solution could be, if the attribute name is combined from it's name and category. In this case, there could be many Author attributes but each in different category, for example:
Category: Document
Attribute: Author
Category: Bibliography
Attribute: Author
The unique attributes name used to identify, search, ... are Document::Author, and Bibliography::Author, but in forms user could choose whether to use the whole name or just the name without category. This would prevent collisions if user chooses to use someones Template that uses attributes with the same name (the requirement would be to have unique attribute category name).
Profits:
I think UR is a great product, but people not used to it dont see the whole power, and it seems to me that Kinook themselves don't market it effectively :)
One installs UR, and the only templates with forms are Appointment, Contact and Task. Imports for CSV, XML, but what's this for an average user who doesnt know what XML is?
I think there should be an official Template Library with Forms, where various Contacts/Tasks/Collections/Bibliography/... could be downloaded. And if the attribute names are like explained above, it would prevent collisions if a Template has its own Attributes category. If in addition, Kinook provides import directly to some of this templates (using saved import feature, but without any user intervention), UR could be easily marketed as a Bibliography tool/ Collection tool/ ... endless possibilities
Any suggestions?