The UX rule of thumb I've heard is "Don't punish the user before they've performed an action."
So best practice is to make optional fields optionally visible, and not to show the red stars and such oj mandatory fields unless the user tries to submit the form without filling out all the necessary fields.
So, move author into ascii? Most 30040s won't be cohesive documents, like an original book, but rather someone's personal compilation of documents or snippets. A sort of remix. They won't have an author, but the 30041s might and they'd probably have author in the ascii or the form would get really messy.
Right now, these are the mandatory tags (we need "d" and we need "title" to make "d"):
[ "d", "
[ "title", "
And these are the optional ones:
[ "author", "
[ "i", "isbn:9780765382030" ],
[ "t", "
[ "published_on", "
[ "published_by", "
[ "image", "
[ "summary", "
[ "version", "
Pulling author from the AsciiDoc would be good. We could even have a prompt before sending to ask if the user wants to use whatever author name we found in the content.
Yeah, I saw the title and author lines in the asciidoc header and got confused because there's also a field. Maybe generally have a metadata section at the top of the preview, with the asciidoc header info pulled, for them to edit.
And then we have it prepared for generating ePUB format. We just have to map to the require ePUB fields.
I didn't even think of the fact that Asciidoc can already have a bunch of the metadata we can process defined as header fields. 🤔 We should probably map-n-pull that into our json tags.
https://docs.asciidoctor.org/asciidoc/latest/document/header-ref/
There will be more optional ones, in the future, depending upon the type of data in the linked events. Like, we'd need "director" for a movie snippet.
The metadata fields are the same, for 30040 and 30041. It's just that the latter contains content and the former contains a list of events.
