I agree the status can be clarified.
Putting the status in the check column is wrong as that should be the description of the check and not the results of the check

I note that the check text for mail is therefore wrong

I note it is not consistent as with this proposal urgent requests row doesn't say none

Personally I would add the clarifying text BELOW the wording of the check text

example

check mail is indeed wrong, went faster than wanted on that one. Correcting right now.

I disagree concerning keeping
"Privacy Policy Published" and adding the real status below. That makes no sense.
Adding the status below is a good idea.
In that case we would have
Privacy Policy
Published (in small)

"Privacy Policy Published" and adding the real status below. That makes no sense.

It is NOT the status it is the name of the check that is being performed

I note it is not consistent as with this proposal urgent requests row doesn't say none

Urgent requests is just a figure or None, not a status, and in the case we take off the status from the other strings and put it below, no need to add the result anyway below urgent requests.

It is NOT the status it is the name of the check that is being performed

That was indeed to clarify as for a Translator as it is very confusing in English
It would have been cleared with
"Published Privacy Policy"

Would that change be accepted?

Would that change be accepted?

yes that works

OK, will modify to fit.

Any suggestion for the button (and status) whne the item does not exist in database?

For that one, it could be modified imho. I was looking for a term to add in the string as well as the button which would mean something as "Does not exists", in a shorter way in any language because of the button limited length. It could be "None" for example (as for the Outstanding Urgent Requests. But not sure. help welcome.

@brianteeman
Definitively,
"Published Private Policy"
and
"Published Request Form Menu Item"

May make sense in English when the title of the column is "Check"
But is is quite hard to forward in other languages.

I suggest another way that would make it easier for all:
Let's call the column "Items to check" or "Items Checked" or "Checked Items", you decide.
Then use "Private Policy"
and the status below in small
same for "Request Form Menu Item"

IMHO, it would be much simpler.

The new article_published key should also be added to the plugin's doc block. When merged, https://docs.joomla.org/J3.x:Integrate_Extensions_with_the_Privacy_Component needs updated with the new key as well.

@mbabker
OK, will do as soon as I finalise the PR. Waiting for feedback on the strings.

To me, that second one (which is very loosely based on your suggestion) is pretty unclear. I don't grasp what is being checked about the privacy policy. And if anything your "Set but not published" thing should be under the status column, not a subtext (help text) under the check column.

It's really designed to be a yes/no checklist (though you've proven at least the policy and menu item checks are multi-state). So think of it as a checklist of sorts:

• Privacy Policy Published
• Request Form Menu Item Published

Then it makes a bit more sense on why it's done the way it is now.

Is that what you want? At least it gives the info of the real status.
Just did it for the article.

I dont understand what the difference is between
Unpublished
and
Exists but not published

To me they are exactly the same just one is more long winded than the other

I wonder if you would be less confused if it was reversed to be displayed as
Check - title

"Exists but unpublished" means that the article or menu item has been created (EXISTS in the DB) but it is NOT published in their managers
I explained that already in the presentation of the PR

As for Unpublished alone, it makes no sense when the item has not been created. I just followed what was done.
In fact it meant "Does not exist"

I would certainly prefer to use
"Unpublished" when the item exist in db and is Unpublished
"Not created" when the item does not exist at all.
"Published" when the item exists and is Published

Let me add that, in this case, it is clarified and we do not need small explanations of the real status.

"Exists but unpublished" means that the article or menu item has been created (EXISTS in the DB) but it is NOT published in their managers

So why say it at all - thats what unpublished means.

I am more confused than ever what you are trying to achieve

I said above
"""
I would certainly prefer to use
"Unpublished" when the item exist in db and is Unpublished
"Not created" when the item does not exist at all INSTEAD OF UNPUBLISHED
"Published" when the item exists and is Published
"""

That would make more sense.

"Exists but unpublished" means that the article or menu item has been created (EXISTS in the DB) but it is NOT published in their managers

So why say it at all - thats what unpublished means.

I am more confused than ever what you are trying to achieve

Basically, he's looking for a status that says "an article was defined as the privacy policy article in a plugin but the article is not published". Whereas what we have now is basically "is the privacy policy article defined"; we're not doing a state check on the article itself.

I am going to modify the PR with this new status button value "Not available", keeping the Check values as you desired.

If you find another wording, will remain to modify that string only.

can you update the screenshot please in the original post to make it easier for testers to know what to expect

After modifications, we now have:

The privacy policy article is defined in the plugin and exists in the database, but is unpublished, therefore the button states "Unpublished"
The menu item does not exist at all (was not created or was deleted), therefore the button states "Not available"
Published will be used when the items exists in db AND are published in their managers.

I have not modified yet the queries in the plugin.
Will do later (if I can).

thanks for the update

Truthfully both links could be outside their status checks as we are
checking there actually is a link before rendering it.

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 11:37 AM infograf768 notifications@github.com
wrote:

@infograf768 commented on this pull request.

In administrator/components/com_privacy/views/dashboard/tmpl/default.php
#22324 (comment):

						</span>

  					<?php endif; ?>
  				</div>
  				<div class="span9">

• 					<div><?php echo JText::_('COM_PRIVACY_STATUS_CHECK_REQUEST_FORM_MENU_ITEM_PUBLISHED'); ?></div>
  

• 					<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['link'] !== '') : ?>
  

• 						<small><a href="<?php echo $this->requestFormPublished['link']; ?>"><?php echo $this->requestFormPublished['link']; ?></a></small>
  

• 					<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['published'] && $this->requestFormPublished['exists']) : ?>
  

• 						<div><?php echo JText::_('COM_PRIVACY_STATUS_CHECK_REQUEST_FORM_MENU_ITEM_PUBLISHED'); ?></div>
  

• 						<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['link'] !== '') : ?>
  

for both form and article I guess, just to simplify the code ?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#22324 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAWfoUehCeg0RLanSmbXWP8o233Jf0hUks5udmdegaJpZM4W1Mx9
.

--

• Michael Please pardon any errors, this message was sent from my iPhone.

Yes that’s fine. It’s the same as if Itemid wasn’t explicitly defined.

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 11:46 AM infograf768 notifications@github.com
wrote:

@infograf768 commented on this pull request.

In administrator/components/com_privacy/views/dashboard/tmpl/default.php
#22324 (comment):

						</span>

  					<?php endif; ?>
  				</div>
  				<div class="span9">

• 					<div><?php echo JText::_('COM_PRIVACY_STATUS_CHECK_REQUEST_FORM_MENU_ITEM_PUBLISHED'); ?></div>
  

• 					<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['link'] !== '') : ?>
  

• 						<small><a href="<?php echo $this->requestFormPublished['link']; ?>"><?php echo $this->requestFormPublished['link']; ?></a></small>
  

• 					<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['published'] && $this->requestFormPublished['exists']) : ?>
  

• 						<div><?php echo JText::_('COM_PRIVACY_STATUS_CHECK_REQUEST_FORM_MENU_ITEM_PUBLISHED'); ?></div>
  

• 						<?php if ($this->requestFormPublished['link'] !== '') : ?>
  

@mbabker https://github.com/mbabker
When I do that, we still get a link for the form with the Home page Itemid
when no menu item exists, is that OK?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#22324 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAWfoRzLVmElG5lUuvZ7VNCMmq8Xubtuks5udmlMgaJpZM4W1Mx9
.

--

• Michael Please pardon any errors, this message was sent from my iPhone.

@mbabker
That is what I was proposing above. In fact getting back to former code for the span9 part.

@mbabker @Quy @ggppdk
Should be OK now. Please test.

For the record (please refrain from commenting :) ):
Both for the column heading and the use of Published in the names of the items checked, it still does not make sense to me.
Specially as the Title of that display is STATUS CHECK (which is self explanatory) and the buttons are now correctly displaying the real status.

It may be OK in English but for the French translation, I will discuss with our team how we present these. First feedbacks I have is that my proposal is considered as a desired simplification.

@Quy
OK now?

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 1e9656c

One more test.
@SharkyKZ ? ?

camelCase article_published? ?

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 1e9656c

tested it works correctly - just needs the comments of @SharkyKZ to be addressed

@SharkyKZ
Please confirm modifications are OK :)

Other cs concerning escaping in privacyconsent queries are not my stuff. As I am a bit fed up of this PR, these will have to be modified by someone else... :)

Please confirm Test OK to get this RTC.

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 2291424

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 2291424

rtc
thanks