Re: [Wikitech-l] Proposal for editing template calls within pages
* Tei oscar.vi...@gmail.com [Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:40:06 +0200]:
Hello.
Heres a screenshot of me editing the wikipedia:
http://zerror.com/unorganized/crap/nogoodenough.png
All the webmasters on this mail list will spot the problem with this
text in 1 second: is unreadable. The space betwen lines, the lines
length, the complexity of the text... Is really hard to read.
A HTML textarea can server for writting emails, and simple text, but
on this image fail short. Textareas are not designed for this, or are
not good enough.
How a webmaster can make that text better? well.. you need to stop
using the HTML textarea widget. And emulate it with divs, css and
javascript. You need to colorize the code. Nowdays *ALL* good code
editors colorize code. If our code editor don't colorize the wiki
sintax, or don't even try, our editor is bad. I could be wrong, but
maybe [[links]] and {{templates}} can be detected and colorized. And
since you are emulating a editor, you can add a bit of usefull
beaviors: make so some areas are read only, so the cursor skip then.
Oh.. and you can make the whole think AJAXified,.. so wen you click
[Edit section] this section become editable, and wen you save, the
edit view send, and is replaced by the result. Why would you want to
people bounce here and there to post stuff in 2009?
He... our computers support 24 M colors, and we are showing text with
2 colors? pfff
I am very much supporting you! Both code colorizing and AJAX editing
preview. And maybe a links code completion - when yuu press [[ it will
open an JS-generated dialog with drop-down title search list. It's not
that wikitext is too hard (with the huge exception of templates) but the
editor is very much restricted.. Though templates surely aren't nice and
it's probably is better to keep them separate and XML-ize them.
Dmitriy
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] JS2 design (was Re: Working towards branching MediaWiki 1.16)
2009/9/26 Michael Dale md...@wikimedia.org: Performance wise I attached a quick test.. seems pretty fast on my machine with a recent firefox build .. but older browsers / machines might be slower...at any rate we should read for both for speed and readability and security review ;) This mailing list scrubs attachments. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Proposal for editing template calls within pages
2009/9/26 Dmitriy Sintsov ques...@rambler.ru: I am very much supporting you! Both code colorizing and AJAX editing preview. The usability initiative intends to do both, in addition to code folding (compressing long and complicated things such as templates, table calls and references into a small placeholder than can be expanded at wish). And maybe a links code completion - when yuu press [[ it will open an JS-generated dialog with drop-down title search list. We've done something similar to this idea, and hope to deploy it on Wikipedia soon. Basically it's a toolbar button that launches a link dialog with title suggestions for internal links. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Special:UploadMogile
Hi! Does anybody actually use Special:UploadMogile? Should we try to fix it to work with the new upload code or just get rid of it? I doubt that, it was proof of concept back when extensions weren't cool. We'd have to do such functionality as extension nowadays, I suppose. Nobody is maintaining that code anyway. Cheers, Domas ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Proposal for editing template calls within pages
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Dmitriy Sintsov ques...@rambler.ru wrote:
* Tei oscar.vi...@gmail.com [Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:40:06 +0200]:
Hello.
Heres a screenshot of me editing the wikipedia:
http://zerror.com/unorganized/crap/nogoodenough.png
All the webmasters on this mail list will spot the problem with this
text in 1 second: is unreadable. The space betwen lines, the lines
length, the complexity of the text... Is really hard to read.
A HTML textarea can server for writting emails, and simple text, but
on this image fail short. Textareas are not designed for this, or are
not good enough.
How a webmaster can make that text better? well.. you need to stop
using the HTML textarea widget. And emulate it with divs, css and
javascript. You need to colorize the code. Nowdays *ALL* good code
editors colorize code. If our code editor don't colorize the wiki
sintax, or don't even try, our editor is bad. I could be wrong, but
maybe [[links]] and {{templates}} can be detected and colorized. And
since you are emulating a editor, you can add a bit of usefull
beaviors: make so some areas are read only, so the cursor skip then.
Oh.. and you can make the whole think AJAXified,.. so wen you click
[Edit section] this section become editable, and wen you save, the
edit view send, and is replaced by the result. Why would you want to
people bounce here and there to post stuff in 2009?
He... our computers support 24 M colors, and we are showing text with
2 colors? pfff
I am very much supporting you! Both code colorizing and AJAX editing
preview. And maybe a links code completion - when yuu press [[ it will
open an JS-generated dialog with drop-down title search list. It's not
that wikitext is too hard (with the huge exception of templates) but the
editor is very much restricted.. Though templates surely aren't nice and
it's probably is better to keep them separate and XML-ize them.
Dmitriy
For templates you can use a Code beatiffier, that unofuscate the code.
Templates can be hard to write, but theres no reason to let then be
hard to read. Maybe MW already do that..
Here is a example using another template language (bbcode):
[uRL]lalala[/URL] = [url]lalala[/url]
[quote=Dan]blabla bla bla[/img] =
[quote= Dani ]
bla bla bla
[/quote]
I know that this maybe is a bad idea, If this may cause other
problems, and theres one million others things that are worth our time
:-I
A serverside Code beatifier can also helps a clientside colorizer.
He can massage the template code first, and be smarter than the
colorizers and prevent problems before hit the colorizer. A code
beafifier can be implemented in a incremental way, the first version
can just lowercase all letter. The colorizer can also be
implemented in a incremental way, starting colorizing simple stuff.
If a colorizing or a beatifier become a problem, can be deactivated,
and things will continue smoothly.
--
--
ℱin del ℳensaje.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Special:UploadMogile
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! Does anybody actually use Special:UploadMogile? Should we try to fix it to work with the new upload code or just get rid of it? I doubt that, it was proof of concept back when extensions weren't cool. We'd have to do such functionality as extension nowadays, I suppose. Nobody is maintaining that code anyway. Like I thought. svn rm then. Bryan ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Proposal for editing template calls within pages
Guys,
Why are we talking XML? Yaron's Semantic Forms survived without XML - yes,
it's definition language is not English, but it's good enough and works
relatively good with the rest of MW syntax.
I think using XML will not necessarily do good here as form creators would
want the language to be close to the rest of the wiki.
Here's the example of the form which is the mix of wikitext, HTML and
regular wiki formatting
http://www.techpresentations.org/w/index.php?title=Form:Presentationaction=edit
It worked for me. Maybe this kind of definition can be merged with Template
pages, but frankly SF's model works pretty well (of course, SF is also smart
about data because of SMW, but it can be more manual).
Thank you,
Sergey
--
Sergey Chernyshev
http://www.sergeychernyshev.com/
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Tei oscar.vi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Dmitriy Sintsov ques...@rambler.ru
wrote:
* Tei oscar.vi...@gmail.com [Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:40:06 +0200]:
Hello.
Heres a screenshot of me editing the wikipedia:
http://zerror.com/unorganized/crap/nogoodenough.png
All the webmasters on this mail list will spot the problem with this
text in 1 second: is unreadable. The space betwen lines, the lines
length, the complexity of the text... Is really hard to read.
A HTML textarea can server for writting emails, and simple text, but
on this image fail short. Textareas are not designed for this, or are
not good enough.
How a webmaster can make that text better? well.. you need to stop
using the HTML textarea widget. And emulate it with divs, css and
javascript. You need to colorize the code. Nowdays *ALL* good code
editors colorize code. If our code editor don't colorize the wiki
sintax, or don't even try, our editor is bad. I could be wrong, but
maybe [[links]] and {{templates}} can be detected and colorized. And
since you are emulating a editor, you can add a bit of usefull
beaviors: make so some areas are read only, so the cursor skip then.
Oh.. and you can make the whole think AJAXified,.. so wen you click
[Edit section] this section become editable, and wen you save, the
edit view send, and is replaced by the result. Why would you want to
people bounce here and there to post stuff in 2009?
He... our computers support 24 M colors, and we are showing text with
2 colors? pfff
I am very much supporting you! Both code colorizing and AJAX editing
preview. And maybe a links code completion - when yuu press [[ it will
open an JS-generated dialog with drop-down title search list. It's not
that wikitext is too hard (with the huge exception of templates) but the
editor is very much restricted.. Though templates surely aren't nice and
it's probably is better to keep them separate and XML-ize them.
Dmitriy
For templates you can use a Code beatiffier, that unofuscate the code.
Templates can be hard to write, but theres no reason to let then be
hard to read. Maybe MW already do that..
Here is a example using another template language (bbcode):
[uRL]lalala[/URL] = [url]lalala[/url]
[quote=Dan]blabla bla bla[/img] =
[quote= Dani ]
bla bla bla
[/quote]
I know that this maybe is a bad idea, If this may cause other
problems, and theres one million others things that are worth our time
:-I
A serverside Code beatifier can also helps a clientside colorizer.
He can massage the template code first, and be smarter than the
colorizers and prevent problems before hit the colorizer. A code
beafifier can be implemented in a incremental way, the first version
can just lowercase all letter. The colorizer can also be
implemented in a incremental way, starting colorizing simple stuff.
If a colorizing or a beatifier become a problem, can be deactivated,
and things will continue smoothly.
--
--
ℱin del ℳensaje.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Proposal for editing template calls within pages
* Sergey Chernyshev sergey.chernys...@gmail.com [Sat, 26 Sep 2009 21:23:25 -0400]: Guys, Why are we talking XML? Yaron's Semantic Forms survived without XML - yes, it's definition language is not English, but it's good enough and works relatively good with the rest of MW syntax. I think using XML will not necessarily do good here as form creators would want the language to be close to the rest of the wiki. Here's the example of the form which is the mix of wikitext, HTML and regular wiki formatting http://www.techpresentations.org/w/index.php?title=Form:Presentationaction=edit It worked for me. Maybe this kind of definition can be merged with Template pages, but frankly SF's model works pretty well (of course, SF is also smart about data because of SMW, but it can be more manual). Hi Sergey, To me it seems that MediaWiki is moving from pure wiki towards CMS, thus, broaden it's usage (in contrary to what's been stated in bold at meta and other sites that MediaWiki is not CMS). Semantic* extensions and Wikia to me looks like a step towards CMS. Many well-made CMS use XML because there are good XML libraries which allows various processing and transformations. Also, I believe that XML was proposed to define names, type and description of template parameters and that's also a good idea. Maybe even implementing the whole templating in XML? But, when it comes to NS_MAIN, I like wikitext, because I am a coder and I like to edit a source. I don't like visual tools, like Dreamweaver, MS Word and so on. Probably the power users, who contribute the most at wikipedia also like wikitext? I don't know whether there was any survey. To these who types fast and knows wikitext, it allows to produce formatted articles quicker than by using the GUI. But, Wikipedia probably requires an enlargement of it's user base, so wysiwyg is also very important. To me it seems that it would be great if Wikipedia was both friendly to these who likes source wikitext and to these who would love the GUI. But, I don't know whether anyone really likes wikitext, besides me. If nobody likes it, then it will be dropped. Dmitriy ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
