Project 1: Wiki

Milestones

Staff Solution

github.com/vault50/e33a-web-solutions/tree/master/1/solution

Please notify Doug if you don’t have access to the above via vault50.

Features

Per the specification for this project, students are expected to implement the following seven features:

• Entry Page: Visiting /wiki/TITLE, where TITLE is the title of an encyclopedia entry, should render a page that displays the contents of that encyclopedia entry.
• Index Page: Update index.html such that, instead of merely listing the names of all pages in the encyclopedia, user can click on any entry name to be taken directly to that entry page.
• Search: Allow the user to type a query into the search box in the sidebar to search for an encyclopedia entry.
• New Page: Clicking “Create New Page” in the sidebar should take the user to a page where they can create a new encyclopedia entry.
• Edit Page: On each entry page, the user should be able to click a link to be taken to a page where the user can edit that entry’s Markdown content in a textarea.
• Random Page: Clicking “Random Page” in the sidebar should take user to a random encyclopedia entry.
• Markdown to HTML Conversion: On each entry’s page, any Markdown content in the entry file should be converted to HTML before being displayed to the user.

This project is graded along the three of axes of Correctness, Design, and Style. Each should be treated as independently as possible (code that is very broken, but has some good ideas that didn’t come to fruition and is extremely well-styled should maybe earn a 2 for Correctness, a 3 for Design, and a 5 for Style, for example.)

Correctness

Award:

• 5 if the requirements above are met with the student having introduced no bugs.
• 4 if there is one minor bug.
• 3 if there are multiple minor bugs, or one major bug, or at least one of the requirements appears to be missing entirely.
• 2 if there are several major bugs, or at least two of the requirements appear to be missing entirely.
• 1 for a very clearly low-effort (missing the implementation of three or more requirements) or very broken submission.
• 0 for no submission at all.

Design

Design is primarily concerned with how elegant, efficient, readable, and clear the student’s code is. Some design questions to consider and leave feedback on include (but are not limited to):

• Is the code unnecessarily complex?
• Is code reused where possible?
• Are there unnecessary loops, conditions, and/or variables?
• Are there places where the student’s code could have been made more efficient?
• Is the code logical in structure?
• Is there repetition of code that could be more cleanly written with the addition of a function?

Award:

• 5 for the best designs, with absolutely no room for improvement.
• 4 for better than average designs, with maybe a few quirks.
• 3 for good, solid designs, though there are a few suggestions for areas for improvement.
• 2 for fair designs that feature significant room for improvement.
• 1 for poor designs reflecting very little effort or consideration of design implications of coding decisions.
• 0 for no submission at all.

Style

Style is concerned with the aesthetics of the code (whitespace, comments, etc.). Some style questions to consider and leave feedback on include (but are not limited to):

• Is the student consistent about the use of single quotation marks vs. double quotation marks?
• Is the use of spacing and indentation consistent?
• Are there appropriate comments in the code?
• Is the use of variable names clear, meaningful, and consistent?
• Do files have appropriate names?
• Are there places where an extra newline would help with readability? Are there places where there are too many unnecessary newlines?
• Do lines run on for a long time where it would have been clearer to separate into multiple lines?

Award:

• 5 for the best style, with virtually no room for improvement.
• 4 for better than average style, with maybe a few quirks.
• 3 for good, solid style, though there are a few suggestions for areas for improvement.
• 2 for fair style that feature significant room for improvement.
• 1 for poor style reflecting very little effort or consideration of aesthetics, commenting, etc.
• 0 for no submission at all.