On 8/20/10 12:57 PM, Maciej Jaros wrote:
>Hi.
>
> Does anybody know which extension Wikia uses currently? On Wikia's SVN
> I've found the RTE extension[1], but I think they at least something
> extra for adding categories...
Not really sure, but I know what you mean.
BTW, I am working on some
Category stuff is a separate extension independent of the RTE.
https://svn.wikia-code.com/wikia/trunk/extensions/wikia/CategorySelect/
Their RTE is an improvement, but last I checked it still has enough
annoying faults to have a number of wikia request it be disabled wiki-wide.
~Daniel Friesen (Da
Hi.
Does anybody know which extension Wikia uses currently? On Wikia's SVN
I've found the RTE extension[1], but I think they at least something
extra for adding categories...
BTW. I think that usability might consider working from their version
rather then developing everything from scratch.
Yes, you have a point. The problem is that I wanted to reuse the
google closure editor, which manipulates pure html.
Anyway, I've *slightly* cleaned the sources (at least it builds
smoothly, with the latest version of the required tools as explained
in the README), and it is online at
http://githu
2010/8/13 William Le Ferrand :
> 1) No, I haven't check that. It is a very important issue, but if the
> current result is not correct it should be a matter of fixing a few
> bugs here and there, not a global design issue.
>
There is a very fundamental issue with converting wikitext to HTML,
then b
2010/8/13 Trevor Parscal :
> I'm not an OCaml programmer, so I'd likely be useless in giving input -
> but open-sourcing it and putting the code in a repository is always a
> good way to find people who are and to get them involved.
Particularly with such a desirable functionality as this.
- d
Very exciting work, thanks for the quality responses.
I'm not an OCaml programmer, so I'd likely be useless in giving input -
but open-sourcing it and putting the code in a repository is always a
good way to find people who are and to get them involved.
- Trevor
On 8/13/10 12:19 PM, William
2010/8/13 William Le Ferrand :
> I'm using a functional language called OCaml (www.ocaml.org). Have you
> ever heard of it?
Our math extensions for displaying TeX use it. In fact, they've been
languishing for a lack of OCaml programmers ...
- d.
___
Hi Trevor,
Thanks for the reply! Actually I wrote this code for fun a few months
ago; the core is done but there is still a lot of room for
improvements ;)
I'm using a functional language called OCaml (www.ocaml.org). Have you
ever heard of it?
It comes with several fancy tools; I used ocamllex
This looks very interesting.
1. Have you been checking the cleanliness of your diffs?
2. It seems like some of the links which link to a different word
than the label text are being rendered incorrectly. Examples
include "parents" and "joint ventures" in the second paragraph.
Hi,
I sent a mail several months ago on this list to 'advertise' for a
wysiwyg editor for wikipedia. It is still hosted on a server, for
instance if you attempt to edit the page Open_innovation you get that
: http://www.myrilion.com:8080/wysiwyg?article=Open_innovation
The point with this editor
Hi, glad to present our first demo on editing media wiki articles:
http://www.screencast.com/t/NmMzMjVkNjUt
Regards,
Pavel
2010/8/3 Павел Петроченко
> Hi,
>
>
> >Yes, of course we are interested on it.
> >Specifically, the ideal WISIWYG MediaWiki editor would allow easy
> >WISIWYG editing to new
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Platonides wrote:
> Tei wrote:
>> What about compiling PHP for the Flash extension?
>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/alchemy/
>>
>> Then you can use a modified version of the original PHP files.
>
> That talks about compiling C/C++ to Flash, not PHP to Flash.
On 8/4/10 3:14 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Neil Kandalgaonkar
> wrote:
>> On a more serious note: when it comes to Flash on Wikimedia projects,
>> the WMF board has said no.
>
> Has it? Where? I think everyone is grudgingly okay for Flash as a
> fallback for browse
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote:
> On a more serious note: when it comes to Flash on Wikimedia projects,
> the WMF board has said no.
Has it? Where? I think everyone is grudgingly okay for Flash as a
fallback for browsers that don't support standards-based markup . . .
On 8/4/10 2:47 PM, Platonides wrote:
>> What about [various insanity snipped] Flash
On a more serious note: when it comes to Flash on Wikimedia projects,
the WMF board has said no.
In this modern age of HTML5 and so on, I wouldn't ever pick Flash as a
technology the WMF should use going forward
> Unless you use hip-hop to do PHP->C++, then alchemy for C++ -> Flash...
> A really crazy idea :)
crazy uneducated idea :)
Domas
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Tei wrote:
> On 3 August 2010 11:18, Marco Schuster wrote:
>> I don't have the link ready, but Google solved this in Google Docs by
>> re-implementing this in Javascript... they intercept mouse
>> movements/clicks and keyboard events and then javascript-render the
>> page.
>> Given the complexity
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Mark Wonsil wrote:
> Not to mention, it puts all of the presentation logic in the article
> which eliminates the benefits of using CSS.
That is not an inherent characteristic of WYSIWYG. It's true of
WYSIWYG as implemented in, for instance, Microsoft Word, but it
> Every time this comes up, I feel compelled to point out that true WYSIWYG has
> to work with all parser tag extensions.
> Otherwise, it's not really WYSIWYG.
Not to mention, it puts all of the presentation logic in the article
which eliminates the benefits of using CSS. I'd much prefer a Conten
On 3 August 2010 11:18, Marco Schuster wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Jacopo Corbetta
> wrote:
>> However, the "editing mode" provided by browsers is a nightmare of
>> incompatibilities. Basically, each browser produces a different output
>> given identical commands, so currently MeanE
Every time this comes up, I feel compelled to point out that true WYSIWYG has
to work with all parser tag extensions. Otherwise, it's not really WYSIWYG.
Jim
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote:
> On 8/3/10 2:18 AM, Marco Schuster wrote:
>
>> I don't have the link ready, but
On 8/3/10 2:18 AM, Marco Schuster wrote:
> I don't have the link ready, but Google solved this in Google Docs by
> re-implementing this in Javascript... they intercept mouse
> movements/clicks and keyboard events and then javascript-render the
> page.
http://googledocs.blogspot.com/2010/05/whats-
Hi,
>Yes, of course we are interested on it.
>Specifically, the ideal WISIWYG MediaWiki editor would allow easy
>WISIWYG editing to newbies, while still allowing to use the full
>wikisyntax to power users, without inserting crappy markup when using
>it, or reordering everything to its liking when
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Jacopo Corbetta
wrote:
> However, the "editing mode" provided by browsers is a nightmare of
> incompatibilities. Basically, each browser produces a different output
> given identical commands, so currently MeanEditor is not completely up
> to the task. An external
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 00:49, Platonides wrote:
> The problem that makes this really hard is that MediaWiki syntax is not
> nice. So I'm a bit skeptical about that fast quality editor. You can
> find in the list archives many discussions about it, and also in wikitext-l.
> Things like providing a
On 8/2/10 9:29 AM, Павел Петроченко wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> At the moment we are discussing an opportunity to create full scale
> true WYSIWYG client for media wiki. To the moment we have a technology
> which should allow us to implement with a good quality and quite fast.
> Unfortunately we are not
Павел Петроченко wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> At the moment we are discussing an opportunity to create full scale
> true WYSIWYG client for media wiki. To the moment we have a technology
> which should allow us to implement with a good quality and quite fast.
> Unfortunately we are not sure
> if there is
Hi guys,
At the moment we are discussing an opportunity to create full scale
true WYSIWYG client for media wiki. To the moment we have a technology
which should allow us to implement with a good quality and quite fast.
Unfortunately we are not sure
if there is a real need/interest for having such
29 matches
Mail list logo
