2015-08-17 19:12 GMT+02:00 Andrea Zanni :
> *Wikisource is still too complicated*, and this is one of the reasons we
> don't have big communities.
>
>
IMHO what is really complicated is, the last step of digitalization (OCR
review + formatting), it's almost impossible to simplify what is
intrinsi
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Alex Brollo wrote:
> IMHO, even if I'm testing the BGB as a personal script, I'm not satisfied
> by it, since - ironically - I don't agree fully with Andrea: I think that a
> good look to wiki code is mandatory, I want to see if transclusion codes
> are OK, I want
t; Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:46:31 +0200
> > From: Andrea Zanni
> > To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Better way to validate pages
> > Message-ID:
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset
g 2015 15:46:31 +0200
> From: Andrea Zanni
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
>
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Better way to validate pages
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2
I like also the idea of more than one click to go from yellow to green.
> I also would like to repeat my question about the Visual Editor: are we
close tho that or nobody is working on it?
Sadly nobody is working on it: I have not moved forward on it since London
hackathon and nobody else have sta
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:06 PM, zdzislaw wrote:
> In the view mode of the yellow Pages (sic! :-)), we can add the "Thin (but
> long) Green Button" (TGB) described: "I read and carefully compared the
> contents with the scan - there's no mistakes." :) Users who "DO read our
> books" (and they do
se, or the purpose of colons at the beginning of a line).
Erasmo Barresi
> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:11:00 +0200
> From: Andrea Zanni
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
>
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Better way to validate pages
> Message
Hello Andrea,
2015-08-12 10:11 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni :
> I read a lot of misunderstanding here,
> What Alex did is just a button that you
> double click and you go directly in the Edit mode. Nothing more, and
such a method of BGB implementation (directly in the edit mode of the Page),
makes my
I read a lot of misunderstanding here,
probably due to the fact that none of us are native speaker.
@Wiera Lee: please, please, please, don't shout.
This is a civil discussion. What Alex did is just a button that you double
click and you go directly in the Edit mode. Nothing more, and only I have
2015-08-12 7:00 GMT+02:00 Alex Brollo :
> Please don't presume that such a controversial tool hase been implemented
> anywhere . "running" only means that che code can run; presently only
> *one* user (Aubrey) can click it, just to test it.
>
> Alex
>
I asked on the frws scriptorium, if the c
Please don't presume that such a controversial tool hase been implemented
anywhere . "running" only means that che code can run; presently only
*one* user (Aubrey) can click it, just to test it.
Alex
2015-08-12 2:24 GMT+02:00 Wiera Lee :
> Luiz Augusto: "Rough but runing code of BGB is read
Luiz Augusto: "Rough but runing code of BGB is ready".
This is not a discussion. They had decided.
We can change nothing. Well... Why go to Vienna?
Wieralee
2015-08-12 1:26 GMT+02:00 Luiz Augusto :
> ("Didn't read the entire thread; too long" warning)
>
> I must agree with PL folks: the BGB i
Luiz Augusto: "Rough but running code of BGB is ready".
This is not a discussion. They have decided.
We can't change nothing. Well... Why go to Vienna?
Wieralee
2015-08-12 1:26 GMT+02:00 Luiz Augusto :
> ("Didn't read the entire thread; too long" warning)
>
> I must agree with PL fo
("Didn't read the entire thread; too long" warning)
I must agree with PL folks: the BGB isn't an improvement. Probably the OCR
quality is great on English, Italian and French for doing such thing, but
it certainly isn't also for Portuguese (PT).
A good improvement will be if a Yellow Big Button w
Rough but running code of BGB is ready, and Andrea can test it to find bugs
and/or drawbacks by now, if he likes.
To lower the risk of a nonsense-click, BGB should pop out after some
reasonable delay - something less than the time needed to carefully compare
the page text and its image. To make s
2015-08-11 20:39 GMT+02:00 Wiera Lee :
>
> On pl.wikisource each correction level means that another person did the
correction again. The green status means the page was corrected three times
by three another persons.
The colours are just for marking the status page, it's not per se a
correction a
On pl.wikisource each correction level means that another person did the
correction again. The green status means the page was corrected three times
by three another persons.
Corrected, not read.
In my opinion Big Green Button Correction is useless. New users can click
only for stats, not for pro
2015-08-11 15:21 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw :
> 2015-08-11 13:59 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON >:
> > You're mixing a little bit « validation » and « perfection ». For
> > example, if a page contains « word » or « wоrd » instead of « word
> > », it's not perfect but it's valid as it invisible for 90% of
>
2015-08-11 13:59 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON :
> You're mixing a little bit « validation » and « perfection ». For
> example, if a page contains « word » or « wоrd » instead of « word
> », it's not perfect but it's valid as it invisible for 90% of
> readers and tools (plus, there is other tools to
Repeating something I tried to explain earlier,
we could try to distinguish "markup=layout" from "text".
But it's very difficult, and I stand with Vigneron saying that we should
aim to a 99,9% accuracy instead of total perfection, becaus the *cost* of
finding that 0,01% is really, really high.
Som
2015-08-11 14:35 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw :
> 2015-08-11 12:34 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON >:
> > 2015-08-11 13:18 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw :
> >> I'll write it again ... that is not safe to validate a page without
> reviewing its wikicode.
> > Are I'm puzzled: why?
> > Strange... Are you against VisualEdito
2015-08-11 12:34 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON :
> 2015-08-11 13:18 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw :
>> I'll write it again ... that is not safe to validate a page without
>> reviewing its wikicode.
> Are I'm puzzled: why?
> Strange... Are you against VisualEditor too?
For example, when someone validate a page
> While suggesting how the Andrea's ideas coud be implemented (in the
> meantime, I wrote some js rows to upload quietly localStorage.rawCode,
> localStorage.pageUser, localStorage.pageLevel, an localStorage.validable
> too when reading any page in view mode), I was perfecly aware of what a
> simil
> Ankry,
> there's no need to shout :-)
> We are just *talking*, nobody is coming to Polish Wikisource and make you
> use a tool you don't want.
> You do what the Polish community wants to do.
I'm sorry, maybe I misunderstood.
I thought you want to include it into ProofreadPage extension as the
de
2015-08-11 13:23 GMT+02:00 Andrea Zanni :
> there's no need to shout :-)
> We are just *talking*, nobody is coming to Polish Wikisource and
> make you use a tool you don't want.
mh...
Tpt suggest that ..."I'll have some free time in a few weeks to implement a
such thing directly into the Proofre
2015-08-11 13:18 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw :
>
> 2015-08-11 11:28 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON >:
> > Then it seems that the quality level has not the same meaning on
> > every wikisources. Typo such as « rn » intead of « m » are usually
> > removed on the red or yellow step on fr.ws (and such obvious err
While suggesting how the Andrea's ideas coud be implemented (in the
meantime, I wrote some js rows to upload quietly localStorage.rawCode,
localStorage.pageUser, localStorage.pageLevel, an localStorage.validable
too when reading any page in view mode), I was perfecly aware of what a
similar tool co
Another question for Tpt: how far is the implementation of the Visual
Editor inside the Proofread Extension?
Who's working on it? Just you, as always?
Aubrey
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:18 PM, zdzislaw wrote:
>
> 2015-08-11 11:28 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON >:
> > Then it seems that the quality l
2015-08-11 13:23 GMT+02:00 Andrea Zanni :
> Ankry,
> there's no need to shout :-)
>
+1, especially when we're actually saying the same thing but with different
words.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
___
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https:/
Ankry,
there's no need to shout :-)
We are just *talking*, nobody is coming to Polish Wikisource and make you
use a tool you don't want.
You do what the Polish community wants to do.
Still, it's 10 years I'm on Wikisource projects (it.ws) and worries me the
most
is that the community grows slw
2015-08-11 11:28 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON :
> Then it seems that the quality level has not the same meaning on
> every wikisources. Typo such as « rn » intead of « m » are usually
> removed on the red or yellow step on fr.ws (and such obvious error
> can be seen before editing, reviewing the fin
I'm not sure we're all talking about the same thing.
First, this tool is just a tool. If someone is misusing a tool, don't blame
the tool, blame (and block) the user of the tool !
Then it seems that the quality level has not the same meaning on every
wikisources. Typo such as « rn » intead of « m
> That's a very good idea.
NO! NO! NO!
It is suggesting new users to behave like bots! Just click and go on?
Why to read the small-lettering texts? Just click the GGB (Great Green
Button).
In Polish language Wikisource we have VERY BAD experience with directing
new users to the final validation p
Yes, I sort of agree with this, I must say!
I love the idea of one-click "validate this and go to next page", but I
reckon it should be when one is viewing wikitext. Maybe it could just be
as simple as "save this and go to next"? Although, then one doesn't get
confirmation that one's edits are
If you wish to add the "Big Validate Button" in a specific Wikisource, it
is your choice. But the Polish language Wikisource will definitely refuse
to use such a tool. So it should never become a general tool.
We have VERY BAD experience with new users making the final validation
process. Noticin
Ideally, yes, the user should proofread the wikitext.
We use wikitext to shape and format the text, we put templates and italics
and headers.
But I agree with Vigneron that for many, many pages in our books this is
not worth it, or, to explain me better:
* many pages are really simple, and if expe
2015-08-10 14:47 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON :
>2015-08-10 15:37 GMT+02:00 Alex Brollo :
>>
>> First point is:
>> is it a safe practice to validate a page without reviewing its raw code?
>
>Probably yes.
>Obviously, it's safer to check the raw code but it's unrealistic to expect
>the raw code to be
That's a very good idea.
A big green button "validate" at the end of the displayed wikitext content of
the page may fit the need. It would open a confirmation popup with an
explanation message the first k times the user click on it in order to make
sure new contributors use it well (with k some
Ok; imagine that while opening a level 3 page, an ajax query uploads
quietly the raw code of the page; as soon as you click the "Big Green
Button" the script could edit the code and send it to the server - in
milliseconds - and immediately could click the next page button.
If a review of page in v
The Big Validate Button is a good idea,
but I also would like a better navigation experience, as it is pretty slow
and cumbersome to got on the top of the page to click a tiny arrow, wait
for the new page, click edit, etc.
Aubrey
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Alex Brollo wrote:
> If this is
If this is true, then to add a big button "Validate" to edit by ajax the
code of the page (the header section only needs to be changed if there's no
error to fix into the txt) should be a banal task for a good programmer.
Perhaps Andrea is asking for much more, but this could be a first step.
Ale
2015-08-10 15:37 GMT+02:00 Alex Brollo :
>
> First point is:
> is it a safe practice to validate a page without reviewing its raw code?
Probably yes.
Obviously, it's safer to check the raw code but it's unrealistic to expect
the raw code to be review for all page. Anyway, the pages doesn't contain
First point is: is it a safe practice to validate a page without reviewing
its raw code? A second point: is it a safe practice to validate a page
without carefully reviewing its transclusion into ns0?
Alex
2015-08-10 10:48 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni :
> As you all probably do,
> I sometimes go a
43 matches
Mail list logo
