Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:43:32PM +0200, John Erling Blad wrote: In my opinion, parsing .js and .css as wikitext is a borken idea. Add some kind of pragmas to the page and strip them off in the ResourceLoader. Going further in that direction, I seem to recall one of the goals of ContentHandler is to allow for custom edit forms depending on the content type of the page. Which means that a JS or CSS page could have a wikitext header that is parsed and a JS/CSS area that is not. But that would still break the backlinks are used to find users who are using a certain script noted at bug 41155, and depending on how transclusion works with that it could re-enable the circumvention of the spam blacklist mentioned somewhere in there. And it might screw up some bots/userscripts/etc that take advantage of the can only be edited by this user admins protection given to user .js and .css pages to store arbitrary data. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
In my opinion, parsing .js and .css as wikitext is a borken idea. Add some kind of pragmas to the page and strip them off in the ResourceLoader. John On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:44 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Krinkle wrote: On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler dan...@brightbyte.de wrote: When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first. Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug. We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed. [1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41155 Well, the current approach is hackish. The links are kind of stored, but not rendered, so you still end up with dead-end pages and a completely surprising result to most users. I think the last thing we need is yet another parser. There is already distinct parsing for weird parts of the MediaWiki UI (such as edit summaries and log comments). I think any further specialized parsers should be shot on-sight. More thoughts here: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/39609 (Limit scope of title-based syntax highlighting). MZMcBride ___ 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
[Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
Hi! When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first. -- daniel ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
It seems like people have some pretty good reasons for parsing JS/CSS pages (categorization, backlinks, speedy deletion templates, etc.), so unless there is some significant disadvantage to MW for enabling parsing, I'm going to have to agree with the bug filer. *--* *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | tylerro...@gmail.com On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler dan...@brightbyte.dewrote: Hi! When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first. -- daniel ___ 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] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler dan...@brightbyte.de wrote: Hi! When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first. -- daniel Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug. We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed. -- Krinkle [1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41155 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
Yes, it should be put back. Unless maybe if there was a way to get out to wikitext from js. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
2012/10/18 Platonides platoni...@gmail.com: Yes, it should be put back. Unless maybe if there was a way to get out to wikitext from js. Perhaps it would make sense to only parse comments? it might slightly degrade performance, though, and would also require a small level of adaptation from users. Strainu ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
On 18/10/12 20:04, Daniel Kinzler wrote: Hi! When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. Yes, categories on JS/CSS pages should continue to work, per my comments on bug 32858 where this was discussed in detail. -- Tim Starling ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Should JS/CSS pages be parsed?
Krinkle wrote: On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler dan...@brightbyte.de wrote: When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was naw, lets get rid of that. So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon). Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858. I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first. Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug. We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed. [1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41155 Well, the current approach is hackish. The links are kind of stored, but not rendered, so you still end up with dead-end pages and a completely surprising result to most users. I think the last thing we need is yet another parser. There is already distinct parsing for weird parts of the MediaWiki UI (such as edit summaries and log comments). I think any further specialized parsers should be shot on-sight. More thoughts here: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/39609 (Limit scope of title-based syntax highlighting). MZMcBride ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
