This one has an input to select the icon. It makes no sense to choose
an icon only by name, thus a <select> is not appropriate, and had to
use a hidden input with a row of button to choose the icon from. This
works now only because there are very few icons; we’ll need to choose
a different approach when there are many more icons.
Since now the icons have to be defined in CSS for both the public and
admin sections, i had to split it into a separate file that both sites
can use. I considered the option to “include” that CSS with m4, like
i do for images in demo.sql, but it made everything too complicated
(e.g., having to call make for each change in the CSS), and decided to
load that CSS in a separate <link>.
We discussed with Oriol how to show these “extra” menu items, as they
can’t be in the horizontal menu we have intended for employees, because
there is not enough horizontal space.
Oriol suggested to move these into the user menu. In fact, the company
settings was already there, which means that i already wanted to do that
from the very beginning, i believe, but i must have forgotten it along
the way…. Or maybe it was because this is where Numerus has the company
settings menu item, too, and i did not see the relation with the rest;
i do not know.
It made no sense to have a file upload in each form that needs a media,
because to reuse an existing media users would need to upload the exact
same file again; this is very unusual and unfriendly.
A better option is to have a “centralized” media section, where people
can upload files there, and then have a picker to select from there.
Ideally, there would be an upload option in the picker, but i did not
add it yet.
I’ve split the content from the media because i want users to have the
option to update a media, for instance when they need to upload a
reduced or cropped version of the same photo, without an edit they would
need to upload the file as a new media and then update all places where
the old version was used. And i did not want to trouble people that
uploads the same photo twice: without the separate relation, doing so
would throw a constraint error.
I do not believe there is any security problem to have all companies
link their media to the same file, as they were already readable by
everyone and could upload the data from a different company to their
own; in other words, it is not worse than it was now.
This page is more or less similar to home, in terms of database: it
has a carousel and a list of items; in this case, the definition of
campsite services.
As i said early, when adding the home carousel, this carousel has its
own relation and set of functions to manage slides. They are also
duplicated in Go code, but i think i will need to refactor it later to
a carousel package or something like that, because both relations have
the exact same fields and types, so it makes no sense to have twice the
same code.
I already did it with the CSS and JavaScript code, mostly because it was
easier to replace the `.surroundings div` selector with `.carousel`, and
because that way i can have a single template that loads and initializes
Slick.
There is no UI to create or edit service definitions, although there are
the SQL functions, because i have no more time now, and Oriol needs to
check that the style is correct for that page.
jordi fita mas