166 lines
		
	
	
		
			9.8 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Markdown
		
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			166 lines
		
	
	
		
			9.8 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Markdown
		
	
	
| # Room list sorting
 | |
| 
 | |
| It's so complicated it needs its own README.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Legend:
 | |
| * Orange = External event.
 | |
| * Purple = Deterministic flow.
 | |
| * Green = Algorithm definition.
 | |
| * Red = Exit condition/point.
 | |
| * Blue = Process definition.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ## Algorithms involved
 | |
| 
 | |
| There's two main kinds of algorithms involved in the room list store: list ordering and tag sorting.
 | |
| Throughout the code an intentional decision has been made to call them the List Algorithm and Sorting
 | |
| Algorithm respectively. The list algorithm determines the primary ordering of a given tag whereas the
 | |
| tag sorting defines how rooms within that tag get sorted, at the discretion of the list ordering.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Behaviour of the overall room list (sticky rooms, etc) are determined by the generically-named Algorithm
 | |
| class. Here is where much of the coordination from the room list store is done to figure out which list
 | |
| algorithm to call, instead of having all the logic in the room list store itself.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Tag sorting is effectively the comparator supplied to the list algorithm. This gives the list algorithm
 | |
| the power to decide when and how to apply the tag sorting, if at all. For example, the importance algorithm,
 | |
| later described in this document, heavily uses the list ordering behaviour to break the tag into categories.
 | |
| Each category then gets sorted by the appropriate tag sorting algorithm.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ### Tag sorting algorithm: Alphabetical
 | |
| 
 | |
| When used, rooms in a given tag will be sorted alphabetically, where the alphabet's order is a problem
 | |
| for the browser. All we do is a simple string comparison and expect the browser to return something
 | |
| useful.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ### Tag sorting algorithm: Manual
 | |
| 
 | |
| Manual sorting makes use of the `order` property present on all tags for a room, per the
 | |
| [Matrix specification](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/r0.6.0#room-tagging). Smaller values
 | |
| of `order` cause rooms to appear closer to the top of the list.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ### Tag sorting algorithm: Recent
 | |
| 
 | |
| Rooms get ordered by the timestamp of the most recent useful message. Usefulness is yet another algorithm
 | |
| in the room list system which determines whether an event type is capable of bubbling up in the room list.
 | |
| Normally events like room messages, stickers, and room security changes will be considered useful enough
 | |
| to cause a shift in time.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Note that this is reliant on the event timestamps of the most recent message. Because Matrix is eventually
 | |
| consistent this means that from time to time a room might plummet or skyrocket across the tag due to the
 | |
| timestamp contained within the event (generated server-side by the sender's server).
 | |
| 
 | |
| ### List ordering algorithm: Natural
 | |
| 
 | |
| This is the easiest of the algorithms to understand because it does essentially nothing. It imposes no
 | |
| behavioural changes over the tag sorting algorithm and is by far the simplest way to order a room list.
 | |
| Historically, it's been the only option in Element and extremely common in most chat applications due to
 | |
| its relative deterministic behaviour.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ### List ordering algorithm: Importance
 | |
| 
 | |
| On the other end of the spectrum, this is the most complicated algorithm which exists. There's major
 | |
| behavioural changes, and the tag sorting algorithm gets selectively applied depending on circumstances.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Each tag which is not manually ordered gets split into 4 sections or "categories". Manually ordered tags
 | |
| simply get the manual sorting algorithm applied to them with no further involvement from the importance
 | |
| algorithm. There are 4 categories: Red, Grey, Bold, and Idle. Each has their own definition based off
 | |
| relative (perceived) importance to the user:
 | |
| 
 | |
| * **Red**: The room has unread mentions waiting for the user.
 | |
| * **Grey**: The room has unread notifications waiting for the user. Notifications are simply unread
 | |
|   messages which cause a push notification or badge count. Typically, this is the default as rooms get
 | |
|   set to 'All Messages'.
 | |
| * **Bold**: The room has unread messages waiting for the user. Essentially this is a grey room without
 | |
|   a badge/notification count (or 'Mentions Only'/'Muted').
 | |
| * **Idle**: No useful (see definition of useful above) activity has occurred in the room since the user
 | |
|   last read it.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Conveniently, each tag gets ordered by those categories as presented: red rooms appear above grey, grey
 | |
| above bold, etc.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once the algorithm has determined which rooms belong in which categories, the tag sorting algorithm
 | |
| gets applied to each category in a sub-list fashion. This should result in the red rooms (for example)
 | |
| being sorted alphabetically amongst each other as well as the grey rooms sorted amongst each other, but
 | |
| collectively the tag will be sorted into categories with red being at the top.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ## Sticky rooms
 | |
| 
 | |
| When the user visits a room, that room becomes 'sticky' in the list, regardless of ordering algorithm.
 | |
| From a code perspective, the underlying algorithm is not aware of a sticky room and instead the base class
 | |
| manages which room is sticky. This is to ensure that all algorithms handle it the same.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The sticky flag is simply to say it will not move higher or lower down the list while it is active. For
 | |
| example, if using the importance algorithm, the room would naturally become idle once viewed and thus
 | |
| would normally fly down the list out of sight. The sticky room concept instead holds it in place, never
 | |
| letting it fly down until the user moves to another room.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Only one room can be sticky at a time. Room updates around the sticky room will still hold the sticky
 | |
| room in place. The best example of this is the importance algorithm: if the user has 3 red rooms and
 | |
| selects the middle room, they will see exactly one room above their selection at all times. If they
 | |
| receive another notification which causes the room to move into the topmost position, the room that was
 | |
| above the sticky room will move underneath to allow for the new room to take the top slot, maintaining
 | |
| the sticky room's position.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Though only applicable to the importance algorithm, the sticky room is not aware of category boundaries
 | |
| and thus the user can see a shift in what kinds of rooms move around their selection. An example would
 | |
| be the user having 4 red rooms, the user selecting the third room (leaving 2 above it), and then having
 | |
| the rooms above it read on another device. This would result in 1 red room and 1 other kind of room
 | |
| above the sticky room as it will try to maintain 2 rooms above the sticky room.
 | |
| 
 | |
| An exception for the sticky room placement is when there's suddenly not enough rooms to maintain the placement
 | |
| exactly. This typically happens if the user selects a room and leaves enough rooms where it cannot maintain
 | |
| the N required rooms above the sticky room. In this case, the sticky room will simply decrease N as needed.
 | |
| The N value will never increase while selection remains unchanged: adding a bunch of rooms after having
 | |
| put the sticky room in a position where it's had to decrease N will not increase N.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ## Responsibilities of the store
 | |
| 
 | |
| The store is responsible for the ordering, upkeep, and tracking of all rooms. The room list component simply gets
 | |
| an object containing the tags it needs to worry about and the rooms within. The room list component will
 | |
| decide which tags need rendering (as it commonly filters out empty tags in most cases), and will deal with
 | |
| all kinds of filtering.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ## Filtering
 | |
| 
 | |
| Filters are provided to the store as condition classes and have two major kinds: Prefilters and Runtime.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Prefilters flush out rooms which shouldn't appear to the algorithm implementations. Typically this is
 | |
| due to some higher order room list filtering (such as spaces or tags) deliberately exposing a subset of
 | |
| rooms to the user. The algorithm implementations will not see a room being prefiltered out.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Runtime filters are used for more dynamic filtering, such as the user filtering by room name. These
 | |
| filters are passed along to the algorithm implementations where those implementations decide how and
 | |
| when to apply the filter. In practice, the base `Algorithm` class ends up doing the heavy lifting for
 | |
| optimization reasons.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The results of runtime filters get cached to avoid needlessly iterating over potentially thousands of
 | |
| rooms, as the old room list store does. When a filter condition changes, it emits an update which (in this
 | |
| case) the `Algorithm` class will pick up and act accordingly. Typically, this also means filtering a
 | |
| minor subset where possible to avoid over-iterating rooms.
 | |
| 
 | |
| All filter conditions are considered "stable" by the consumers, meaning that the consumer does not
 | |
| expect a change in the condition unless the condition says it has changed. This is intentional to
 | |
| maintain the caching behaviour described above.
 | |
| 
 | |
| One might ask why we don't just use prefilter conditions for everything, and the answer is one of slight
 | |
| subtlety: in the cases of prefilters we are knowingly exposing the user to a workspace-style UX where
 | |
| room notifications are self-contained within that workspace. Runtime filters tend to not want to affect
 | |
| visible notification counts (as it doesn't want the room header to suddenly be confusing to the user as
 | |
| they type), and occasionally UX like "found 2/12 rooms" is desirable. If prefiltering were used instead,
 | |
| the notification counts would vary while the user was typing and "found 2/12" UX would not be possible.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ## Class breakdowns
 | |
| 
 | |
| The `RoomListStore` is the major coordinator of various algorithm implementations, which take care
 | |
| of the various `ListAlgorithm` and `SortingAlgorithm` options. The `Algorithm` class is responsible
 | |
| for figuring out which tags get which rooms, as Matrix specifies them as a reverse map: tags get
 | |
| defined on rooms and are not defined as a collection of rooms (unlike how they are presented to the
 | |
| user). Various list-specific utilities are also included, though they are expected to move somewhere
 | |
| more general when needed. For example, the `membership` utilities could easily be moved elsewhere
 | |
| as needed.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The various bits throughout the room list store should also have jsdoc of some kind to help describe
 | |
| what they do and how they work.
 |