Plugins type definition in bower.json needs to be more self-explanatory

[taylortom]

adaptlearning/adapt_authoring#1043

i.e.

{
  "component": "something",
  "extension": "something",
  "menu": "something",
  "theme": "something"
}

Suggest something like:

{
  "pluginType": "component",
}

[oliverfoster]

+1

[oliverfoster]

might have to do both for a time beng?

[taylortom]

Yep, happy to do that

[moloko]

could we also add fields to state whether the plugin:

• is authoring tool compatible
• has accessibility support
• has RTL support
  ?

[moloko]

Actually I suppose the last two could be included in the README - but I think the AT compatibility one would be useful. Also, you might want to search only for plugins that are AT-compatible, that would make this possible.

[taylortom]

I think all of those are vital for any plugin browsers (including the one on the community site). I'd like to maybe even see browser support added.

[moloko]

this has been sitting around for a year now, anything further on this?

[oliverfoster]

i'm a crossover adapt-cli / AT / framework thing that we should defo still do. Just needs some political will.

[taylortom]

Yep, still keen to get this in, but will prompt some reworking of the AT code, so needs to be discussed.

[oliverfoster]

I reckon we could do the adapt-cli bits first. Then the plugins, then the AT. Both styles should run concurrently to avoid any funny issues.