[dev] Dashboard and anchoring the apps in Horde4

[Michael M Slusarz]

Quoting Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:

> Zitat von Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck at horde.org>:
>
>> Quoting Gunnar Wrobel <p at rdus.de>:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I recently created a demo server setup for the current Horde4  
>>> version which will hopefully also go online as demo.horde.org  
>>> soon. Looking at the full groupware stack in action as available  
>>> from our current git checkout raises a few questions concerning  
>>> the current user interface.
>>>
>>> My main source of confusion:  What could or should be the  
>>> anchoring point for the different applications within Horde4?
>>>
>>> If I look at our groupware bundle then I would say that the intial  
>>> "Dashboard" or "Portal" should be provided by the "horde" base  
>>> application and "horde" should also provide the framework that  
>>> allows switching between applications and accessing generic  
>>> functionality.
>>>
>>> Right now both dynamic imp and kronolith seem to be able to  
>>> provide the same anchoring functionality by displaying other apps  
>>> in their viewport - at least concerning the static apps.
>>>
>>> Both apps are unable to display each other in their viewport  
>>> though and resort to a full switch of the application in case you  
>>> select "Imp" from within "Kronolith" and vice versa. Do we really  
>>> intend to allow both Imp and Kronolith to be "the" base  
>>> application for a Horde installation?
>>>
>>> With the capabilities of the "horde" application added to the mix  
>>> it is currently easy to generate a setup that behaves totally  
>>> weird when it comes to switching applications.
>>>
>>> Do we already have a set of ideas on how to tackle this specific  
>>> problem? Do we aim for a single app being the frame around all  
>>> other apps?
>>
>> I don't think any app should frame all other apps. I think each  
>> dynamic app should be as consistent as possible in its *general*  
>> frame, and that the main Horde dashboard should provide the  
>> "portal" type functionality, with a similar frame.
>
> It's still required for SAPO and makes (only) sense for any other  
> installation where the main application is either the webmail or the  
> calendar, with the other apps just being small helpers.
> We should add a configuration switch for this case though, because  
> it won't fit the needs of the majority.

I agree that there should be a general template for the sidebar.  And  
that each application should be a different page (we should not try to  
keep both kronolith and imp in memory and dynamically switch between  
them).  Also agree with Jan that the "SAPO mode" should be an option.

michael

-- 
___________________________________
Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]