age an "estimated reading
time" could be provided. Along with maybe a word count, character count,
etc.
Since I'm here, quick thanks to the MediaWiki community for creating
such wonderful wiki software!
Regards,
John Elliot V
--
E: j...@jj5.
now if it was on
the agenda. Look forward to seeing it when it ships.
On 2012-07-28 08:36, Terry Chay wrote:
> Are you a Brandon plant trying to get us to resource Athena again? :-)
>
> On Jul 27, 2012, at 3:01 AM, John Elliot wrote:
>
>> Are there any initiatives in the MediaWiki c
On 2012-07-27 23:52, Jon Robson wrote:
> The Wikipedia mobile site is being made mobile first using responsive
> design techniques. The plan is for it to eventually mature into a
> responsive Athena skin that can also be used on desktop.
Any idea about when the responsive Athena skin might be read
Are there any initiatives in the MediaWiki community for a MediaWiki
theme that supports 'responsive design' [1] -- where content is properly
laid out in an accessible form on all manner of devices including
desktops and smart phones?
[1] http://www.alistapart.com/articles/responsive-web-design/
On 12/08/2011 10:44 PM, John Elliot wrote:
> It wouldn't be the same type of "blow by blow" attribution that you get
> where you can see a log of specifically what contributions particular
> users had made
Although I guess it would be possible to go all out and support th
On 12/08/2011 10:31 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> This one's tricky, because that's not free content, for good reason.
> It would need to be present for correct attribution at the least. I
> don't see anything intrinsically hard about that - have I missed
> anything about it that makes it hard?
Well y
On 12/08/2011 8:55 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> THESIS: Our inadvertent monopoly is *bad*. We need to make it easy to
> fork the projects, so as to preserve them.
I have an idea that might be practical and go some way toward solving
your problem.
Wikipedia is an impressive undertaking, and as you m
On 10/08/2011 12:19 PM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> Oh right, one the 'other' things I had one mind but couldn't remember
> while writing was converting things like valign, width/height, etc...
> into css styles.
That'd be nice.
> Though given the fact that block content in a th in XHTML was valid an
On 10/08/2011 11:19 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> Would you like to argue for a $wgStricterParsing bool that will
> sacrifice parser output consistency for things like folding == headers
> into parent th's (perhaps turn into a span if they explicitly use a
> instead of ==), and other things we haven'
On 10/08/2011 10:16 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> On 11-08-09 04:14 PM, John Elliot wrote:
>> On 10/08/2011 9:08 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
>>> I can't even find the spot in the HTML4 or XHTML1 spec where it says
>>> that a perfectly fine marked up list is invalid if
On 10/08/2011 9:49 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> WikiText is loose so instead of errors, if the
> parser doesn't like something you inputted it's not going to pass that
> through raw and let a html validator say it's wrong, it's going to
> decide it doesn't like it and treat it as plaintext.
Well, t
On 10/08/2011 9:13 AM, Platonides wrote:
> John Elliot wrote:
>> Ah, but I don't know how to use the hook (yet), do I? :P I'll figure it
>> out and fix up my code.
>
> See docs/hooks.txt from your mediawiki folder.
Will do. Thanks!
_
On 10/08/2011 9:08 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> On 11-08-09 03:37 PM, John Elliot wrote:
>>http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://en.wikipedia.org
> Embarrassing? You do realize that the validator is complaining that it
> sees ``, right?
I hadn't realised that.
> I c
On 10/08/2011 8:55 AM, Chad wrote:
> Most of our users won't know or care whether their pages validate.
> Those that do presumably know how to use a validator already.
Isn't an unstated goal of MediaWiki/Wikipedia to decrease ignorance?
If you already know how to use a validator you might still b
On 10/08/2011 8:47 AM, Chad wrote:
> I guess that's only embarrassing if those sorts of things bother you.
I think it would be fair to have it both ways. There are a class of
people who are bothered by things of that sort. I'm sure I'm not alone,
at least on this issue. :P
> I'm with Dan on thi
On 10/08/2011 6:53 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> I can't comprehend the obsession with killing de-facto standardized
> patterns just to shove a button on a site to a picky validator that only
> takes into account a single relevant standard.
One reason would be to help avoid embarrassments like this:
On 10/08/2011 6:50 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Platonides wrote:
>> ResourceLoaderDynamicStyles was purposefully added even though it is not
>> conforming.
> AFAIK tags with made-up name="" attributes are perfectly legal,
> at least in HTML5.
There's a list: http:/
On 10/08/2011 6:53 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> Please don't edit DefaultSettings.php; Your $wgFooterIcons change could
> have been done in LocalSettings.php without causing trouble for yourself
> when you upgrade.
Ah, didn't realise LocalSettings.php was the right place to do my edits.
I guess I
On 10/08/2011 6:43 AM, Platonides wrote:
> Theoretically, the wiki should never generate invalid HTML, but it's not
> perfect.
It was pretty close to perfect. I only had to comment out two features
to get conformance with the (experimental) HTML5 validator. I assumed
HTML5 output in my code, alt
Hi there.
I've made some modifications to MediaWiki 1.17.0 that others might be
interested in. I'd be flattered if some or all of them made it into the
official MediaWiki release.
Firstly, I've added links to the W3C HTML validation service hosted by
MIT. These show up as 'W3C HTML 5.0' icons
20 matches
Mail list logo
