Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
Hi,There seems to be an issue with the extension: It seems when I saved a draft after editing a section, the draft was considered a draft of the corresponding section number (it was mentioned as Article#Section name in the list of drafts). If the given section was removed, clicking on this saved draft I received the error that section number 6 doesn't exist, and thus it could not restore the draft. Changing the page, to again contain at least 6 sections, restoring the draft was possible, at the cost of removing the new section that has replaced it. I believe that this is not really user friendly, even if this is intended behaviour. (You click on a named section and receive a raw number (of the section) in the error message; without any help message or the possibility to restore the text of your draft is someone changes the page in the mean time in an unexpected way). Best regards, Bence Damokos On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote: Alex wrote: A possible option would be to have a checkbox (probably on Special:Drafts itself, to avoid cluttering the edit page and to avoid accidental clicks) to mark drafts as public. This would be especially useful when combined with bug 17067, the ability to create drafts of protected pages, a user could make a draft, mark it as public, then link to it for an admin to add to the page. I worry it goes beyond what Drafts attempted to do. So now you start having queues of Drafts, someone seeing the public draft shouldn't delete others drafts when saving, but perhaps the original draft should be marked as 'Foo did an edit from this'. Should the history mark the draft author somewhere? Welcome to the Wikimedia developer life, Trevor. :) ___ 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] Drafts extension in testing
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO we still need some kind of saving into firefox storage, for cases like a read-only db. Instead of 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'No, you can't, the db is read-only', 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'The site is read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'. This can be done in cutting-edge browsers using HTML5's localStorage and sessionStorage. What about Google Gears? Yeah, it's Google, but GG supports a variety of browsers and we wouldn't have to wait for M$ to support it properly in IE 20. Marco ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Marco Schuster ma...@harddisk.is-a-geek.org wrote: What about Google Gears? Yeah, it's Google, but GG supports a variety of browsers and we wouldn't have to wait for M$ to support it properly in IE 20. IE8b2 already supports localStorage, from what I've heard, more or less according to spec. The problem is legacy browsers. These will have to be handled somehow regardless of whether people install Gears, since we can't expect many people to install Gears. The extra effort to implement three different ways of doing things (localStorage + Gears + legacy fallback) isn't worth it: the number of people with Gears but not localStorage is probably very small. Since Gears is open-source, there should be no principled problem with using it. (I'm not sure why you think anyone would object on the basis that Google makes it -- would you expect objections to use of MySQL or Java because Sun makes those, or YUI because Yahoo! makes it?) But pragmatically, I doubt it has enough market adoption to be worth supporting. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On 1/20/09 3:14 PM, Platonides wrote: Brion Vibber wrote: Client-side storage would be fantastic (and avoid unnecessary server round-trips). We discussed this in original planning but didn't get round to implementing it yet. I thought the rationale was to allow people to migrate browsers. Not specifically, though that can be a useful aspect of server-side draft storage. -- brion ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
Alex wrote: A possible option would be to have a checkbox (probably on Special:Drafts itself, to avoid cluttering the edit page and to avoid accidental clicks) to mark drafts as public. This would be especially useful when combined with bug 17067, the ability to create drafts of protected pages, a user could make a draft, mark it as public, then link to it for an admin to add to the page. I worry it goes beyond what Drafts attempted to do. So now you start having queues of Drafts, someone seeing the public draft shouldn't delete others drafts when saving, but perhaps the original draft should be marked as 'Foo did an edit from this'. Should the history mark the draft author somewhere? Welcome to the Wikimedia developer life, Trevor. :) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
wikitech-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote on 17/01/2009 00:38:38: Ok, things are finally starting to normalize as far as getting away from fundraiser craziness, preparing regular releases, and generally getting on with making things better for users! I've enabled the Drafts extension for testing on http://test.wikipedia.org -- this little cutie was new staff dev Trevor Parscal's first assignment here, but deployment got pushed back when we went full-steam on fundraiser banner stuff. I've written up a quickie blog post with some purty screen shots: http://leuksman.com/log/2009/01/16/drafts-extension-enabled-on-test-wikipedia/ Suggestions for improvements to the UI and workflow are always welcome! Is there an API for getting/saving the draft edits? -- Jim Higson Web CMS Developer BSP, University of Oxford tel: 01865 2 80691 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
Brion Vibber schreef: On Jan 20, 2009, at 2:15, Jim Higson jim.hig...@admin.ox.ac.uk wrote: wikitech-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote on 17/01/2009 00:38:38: Suggestions for improvements to the UI and workflow are always welcome! Is there an API for getting/saving the draft edits? Not currently, but that'd be a great thing to have for third-party editing tools. I'll put it on my TODO list, which means I hope to finish it this month (my TODO list has grown considerably lately). Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
It seems to me that the Drafts extension provides a neat feature with the potential to save data from being lost by accident in many cases. It also seems like adding a per-user setting to enable/disable it would be trivial and also useful for the few (or perhaps many) users who may find it worth disabling. Additionally the addition of a disable / enable setting would not detract from the features or fuxtionality of the extension. Finally it may be less offensive, especially to our avid contributors, to add a new optional feature rather than a mandatory one. Since the features of the extension are disabled for unregistered users already, adding such a setting would truly be a matter of adding a few more lines of code in a few very obvious places. Additionally it may be useful (or at least interesting) to be able to study the statistics of how many / what kind of editors really do disable the extension - as it may be a fair metric on how likely different kinds of users are to accept (or reject) modifications to the editing process. These studies may help to make future feature enhancements more successful and less alienating. Does anyone actually object to the addition of a disable drafts feature? - Trevor ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote: Since the features of the extension are disabled for unregistered users already Is this a design decision, or just to simplify implementation? You could use a cookie or something, but if you did that you'd have to make sure Squid doesn't serve pages differently because of it. Does anyone actually object to the addition of a disable drafts feature? Yes. For virtually any feature imaginable, there will be some minority of users who don't like it. That does not imply that we should add a user preference to disable every single feature we add. Every extra user preference clutters up the user preferences screen, making it harder to use; and adds more code paths, making bugs harder to track down. In this case, as far as I can tell, the only thing disabling the feature for a given user would do is hide one button from the UI. We already have a mechanism by which users can do things like that if they really care: they can use a CSS rule in their user stylesheet. Or, they could just ignore the button, which doesn't seem like an excessive hardship. If the extension is adding lots of annoying interface elements when the user actually has no drafts saved, that's possibly a problem that should be fixed for all users of the extension. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
Aryeh Gregor wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote: Since the features of the extension are disabled for unregistered users already Is this a design decision, or just to simplify implementation? You could use a cookie or something, but if you did that you'd have to make sure Squid doesn't serve pages differently because of it. I don't think it would be wise to add that for anonymous users. People could be seeing drafts from other people and we would be unable to assist or even verify reports of things that people see that their coworkers are writing. They could benefit from drafts, but in that case better to do it on the browser itself. IMHO we still need some kind of saving into firefox storage, for cases like a read-only db. Instead of 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'No, you can't, the db is read-only', 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'The site is read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'. A completely different approach could be to allow anyone to view other's drafts. As a new feature, it could be accepted as it is, without treating it as a completely privacy section. Normal wikipedians won't mind of people seeing the article as they're writing in. However, the auto-save-draft may conflict with it. BTW, the discard link should go via $wgScriptPath not $wgArticlePath Doing this could lead to eg. search ngines following those links (although not likely to cause problems for *this* extension) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think it would be wise to add that for anonymous users. People could be seeing drafts from other people and we would be unable to assist or even verify reports of things that people see that their coworkers are writing. So? They could benefit from drafts, but in that case better to do it on the browser itself. I don't see a practical difference between that and using cookies here (except, e.g., DB read-only). IMHO we still need some kind of saving into firefox storage, for cases like a read-only db. Instead of 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'No, you can't, the db is read-only', 'You can't save, the site is read-only'-'Save-draft'-'The site is read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'. This can be done in cutting-edge browsers using HTML5's localStorage and sessionStorage. A completely different approach could be to allow anyone to view other's drafts. As a new feature, it could be accepted as it is, without treating it as a completely privacy section. Normal wikipedians won't mind of people seeing the article as they're writing in. However, the auto-save-draft may conflict with it. I'd be completely behind this, now that you mention it. It's like how we don't allow private discussions between users (except by e-mail, okay). We should be encouraging transparency at every step of using the software. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
Yeah, get on that. We call it a feature...but it clearly doubles as a drama-generator for those communities prone to such antics. -Chad On Jan 20, 2009 6:35 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/1/20 Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com: Vry bad idea. I can already see enwiki having ArbCom cases about stuff someone wanted t... No, no, this is a feature. The only way to fix en:wp is to cause the dramatic core to enter final meltdown and annihilate itself, then the people who write an encyclopedia can get on with that. - d. ___ 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] Drafts extension in testing
On 1/17/09 6:44 PM, Jackey Tse wrote: can't save summary? Should work. Does it behave differently to what you expect? -- brion ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: Although the problem could be avoided for drafts by using browser local storage for the data, or requiring some cookie as a key. Which kind of kills the save progress at home and continue at work use-case, for no very good reason. I don't think we care if people use Wikipedia as a private datastore. If they really felt like it, they could dump stuff somewhere in their preferences, their signature or something (do we actually validate that 255-char limit on the server side?). When people make a WikipediaDraftFS, then we can start to take action. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drafts extension in testing
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: After trying it out on testwikipedia, I am very impressed. This is a feature I have long been waiting for, and it's finally a reality. :) Is there an estimate as to when this may go live on WMF servers? per brion in previous issues: when it's ready? :-) -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 --- Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
