Make more information of gloss publicly accessible

[rem0g]

For example https://signbank.cls.ru.nl/dictionary/gloss/729 only show video and senses, it's too short of information for non logged in users.

The page should display relation with other glosses, such as variants (METRO-A and METRO-B).
Phonology
Voorbeeldzinnen
NMM videos
And finally 3-perspective video

@uklomp let me know if you agree with this.

[uklomp]

There is indeed a difference between the public version and the gloss-detail page (last one only visible for logged in users). As I understand it, you don't want this difference anymore Gomer? I'd like to know why this difference was there in the first place, maybe there was a good reason for this? @ocrasborn

[uklomp]

I will discuss this together with Floris and Marloes - on the one hand reconsidering what should be publicly available, on the other hand also keeping in mind that colleagues might be developing a more public friendly interface anyway.

[susanodd]

It's fairly easy to add the requested information.

Since the non-NGT datasets have their own permissions, and since each gloss can be visible or not (In Web setting), then the information that's shown can be controlled that way.

The new Synset Wordnet information might be nice in the public view. There are also social media links in the public view.

[rem0g]

I will discuss this together with Floris and Marloes - on the one hand reconsidering what should be publicly available, on the other hand also keeping in mind that colleagues might be developing a more public friendly interface anyway.

Not to start a discussion here; but since Signbank is a scientifically lexicographically dictionary subsided by the dutch government and they are all available on the Signbank commercially-free; it would not make sense not to publish all relevant details if you get my gist?

I also want to know opinion from @ocrasborn

[ocrasborn]

Hi all, what is in the public view now was not carefully chosen by me, we simply copied the Auslan Signbank public view. I agree with @rem0g that it would be appropriate to make much more ‘public’ in the sense of easily accessible for anyone, in particular the language community.

What kept me back in the past is simply that it’s not easy to develop an interface where everything speaks for itself, we simply didn’t invest in that until now. See however the pilot version of an app developed by @TobiasCunnen , which is much nicer for lay users than simply a list of text values

[uklomp]

I will discuss this together with Floris and Marloes - on the one hand reconsidering what should be publicly available, on the other hand also keeping in mind that colleagues might be developing a more public friendly interface anyway.

Not to start a discussion here; but since Signbank is a scientifically lexicographically dictionary subsided by the dutch government and they are all available on the Signbank commercially-free; it would not make sense not to publish all relevant details if you get my gist?

I also want to know opinion from @ocrasborn

I completely agree about the subsidy etc.. but at the same time I'm thinking: having an account is not really difficult right? You only need an email address. People get access automatically so I dare say it's quite publicly available. And some might say that the simple overview is actually more user-friendly.

BUT I also see that we agree that at least for NGT, most (all?) details from the 'details' page could be made publicly available. The question is now if we should consult the other dataset managers first, to implement this for the whole website, and if we want the 'public view' and 'details' to be more alike, or if one of the two pages is superfluous now... also, since we will build another platform together with TYD, should we focus on that instead? These are the questions I want to discuss with Marloes and Floris but feel free to write your opinion here!

[susanodd]

The primary difference is the EDIT capability on the Gloss Detail. There is a huge amount of code related to this. The Gloss Edit page has 1000 lines of code just for the Senses, to be able to edit them.

It's straightforward to add the information requested by @rem0g to the public Gloss template page.

CODE: the template page for public view needs to remain separate from the template with Edit in the implementation. This has to do with all the urls to update the gloss in the database. Permissions are needed for each of these.

For the public template, Django does not need to generate any code in the browser for the "edit" related code.

The Gloss Edit template has 3000 lines of code. Plus numerous javascript files.

To reduce the amount of code, it has not been possible to put the code into separate templates to load. The translations inside of the loaded templates weren't processed. (There have been various issues for this in the past, but nobody solved this.) This has been successful with AJAX calls that insert the results into the page.