Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

James Forrester wrote: >​No. The Drafts extension (and any feature that puts hidden content on the >servers) was veto'ed years ago by Legal. We need to stop beating this dead >horse. I seem to remember you making a number of claims about the use of drafts by terrorists and child pornographers and

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

> > ​No. The Drafts extension (and any feature that puts hidden content on the > servers) was veto'ed years ago by Legal. We need to stop beating this dead > horse. > > J. Err, what? Quick don't tell legal about Special:UploadStash, or the "userjs-" options api. -- As a quick hack I made a l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:00 AM, James Forrester wrote: > ​No. The Drafts extension (and any feature that puts hidden content on the > servers) was veto'ed years ago by Legal. We need to stop beating this dead > horse. > If that is the case, it should be expressed more clearly at T39992

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:59 AM, James Forrester wrote: > > > A paragraph-level diff means that you only get an edit conflict if two > > people change the same paragraph. A character-level diff would mean, > then, > > that you only get a conflict if they change the same character? That > sounds >

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

My wiki (zeldawiki.org) used to have such an extension to inform people when someone else was already editing the page. However, it was not compatible with newer versions of MediaWiki and was subsequently removed. I would like to voice my support for such features being integrated either into the M

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 20 November 2014 09:33, Gergo Tisza wrote: > Anyway, the proper solution for this problem is autosaving article drafts. > IIRC the Drafts extension > is > basically ready but needs usability improvements, and development has > stalled because w

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 20 November 2014 09:30, Gergo Tisza wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:03 AM, James Forrester < > jforres...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > > > ​​Moving to character-level rather than paragraph-level diffing might > help > > here, potentially. I vaguely​ remember that we attempted that and abandon

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote: > I've always thought that the reason for the current ordering is so that > people don't blindly press "Save" again and undo others' changes. Instead they blindly press "Save" again and lose their own changes. Arguably less bad but sti

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:03 AM, James Forrester wrote: > ​​Moving to character-level rather than paragraph-level diffing might help here, potentially. I vaguely​ remember that we attempted that and abandoned > it because it caused more issues than it solved back in ?2004, though. > A paragrap

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Wed Nov 19 2014 at 3:50:02 PM Nathan wrote: > Why not just interleave or nest the conflicted edit in the history of the > page? So if you are editing revision 1, and conflict with someone elses > revision 2, save your revision as 2 and the next person's revision as 3? > There's some ugliness i

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:56 PM, James Forrester wrote: > On 16 November 2014 14:36, Pine W wrote: > > > James: would it be possible to automatically save the text of a page to a > > user's sandbox when they encounter an edit conflict? This would overwrite > > the content of the sandbox, but tha

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2014, at 10:22, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Zack Weinberg wrote: > >On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Alex Monk wrote: > >> It sounds like the data loss here was purely due to user error, David. > > > >Don't blame the victim. > > > >> Maybe we could allow saving things to a given sub

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

* Zack Weinberg wrote: >On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Alex Monk wrote: >> It sounds like the data loss here was purely due to user error, David. > >Don't blame the victim. > >> Maybe we could allow saving things to a given subpage of their user page > >Users/{name}/backup/{pagetitle}/{serial nu

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 19:56:04 +0100, James Forrester wrote: Maybe we should make the (read only) "your content" box more prominent, appearing before the "current content" one? Not sure this would help more than it would hinder everyone for the order to be reversed. I've always thought that t

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

I think it would be ok to have a second "Save page" prompt that offers to save the page in a user's userspace. The save location could be something like User:Jimbo\editconflicts\pagename Auto-deletion of the edit conflict save would not be necessary. I also like Zack's suggestion. I think that c

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 16 November 2014 16:27, svetlana wrote: > On the second edit conflict, I read the message at the page top. It says: > > Someone else has changed this page since you started editing it. The upper > text area contains the page text as it currently exists. **Your changes are > shown in the lower

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 16 November 2014 14:36, Pine W wrote: > James: would it be possible to automatically save the text of a page to a > user's sandbox when they encounter an edit conflict? This would overwrite > the content of the sandbox, but that could be reverted using the normal > history page for the sandbox

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 7:27 PM, svetlana wrote: > On the second edit conflict, I read the message at the page top. It says: > > Someone else has changed this page since you started editing it. The upper > text area contains the page text as it currently exists. **Your changes are > shown in the

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On the second edit conflict, I read the message at the page top. It says: Someone else has changed this page since you started editing it. The upper text area contains the page text as it currently exists. **Your changes are shown in the lower text area.** You will have to merge your changes int

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 16 November 2014 22:58, Zack Weinberg wrote: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Alex Monk wrote: >> It sounds like the data loss here was purely due to user error, David. > Don't blame the victim. +1. This is precisely the dataloss that needs to be averted. >> Maybe we could allow saving

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

At least we agree that there is a design problem here. I think blaming users/customers tends to cause unnecessary drama and drive people away. Yes, I should have read the prompts more carefully and checked that I was copying offline what I thought I was copying, which was the wrong version. Howeve

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 16 November 2014 22:36, Pine W wrote: > I was looking in the wrong place for my text, and I copied the wrong > portion of > text in my haste to save it. The text is now permanently gone. On 16 November 2014 22:58, Zack Weinberg wrote: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Alex Monk wrote: > >

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Well, judging by the number of occurrences of data loss with edit conflicts and the ease of losing data due to edit conflicts, I would say this is a design problem at least as much as user error. If I get tripped up by this, imagine the number of new users who get confused and give up. If this had

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Alex Monk wrote: > It sounds like the data loss here was purely due to user error, David. Don't blame the victim. > Maybe we could allow saving things to a given subpage of their user page Users/{name}/backup/{pagetitle}/{serial number} ? That gets rid of the "

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

It sounds like the data loss here was purely due to user error, David. Also, Pine, users do not have a 'sandbox' as far as the software is aware. Maybe we could allow saving things to a given subpage of their user page though. I wonder if there would be issues with this idea due to missing history

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 16 November 2014 22:36, Pine W wrote: > James: would it be possible to automatically save the text of a page to a > user's sandbox when they encounter an edit conflict? This would overwrite > the content of the sandbox, but that could be reverted using the normal > history page for the sandbox

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Svetlana: having accidentally tested this "feature" again, yes. I was looking in the wrong place for my text, and I copied the wrong portion of text in my haste to save it. The text is now permanently gone. Judging by the number of times that I hear about edit conflicts, I have plenty of company wi

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Please endure. That's the way forward now. For now, technically, there's no known or brought-forth solution, I'll recommend you endure. I'm sorry, but that's the reality many people face. On Nov 16, 2014 10:07 PM, "Pine W" wrote: > I have just lost *two hours* of work due to an edit conflict. I

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Doesn't edit conflict show your content at the bottom of the edit conflict page? A bit unintuitive, but should be there. On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, at 09:07, Pine W wrote: > I have just lost *two hours* of work due to an edit conflict. I thought > using my browser's back button would fix it, but the te

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

I have just lost *two hours* of work due to an edit conflict. I thought using my browser's back button would fix it, but the text is gone forever. Argh. Pine *This is an Encyclopedia* *One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of our

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 13 November 2014 06:40, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > What's the point in being (allegedly) "responsible" of something you can't > influence? ​Hey Nemo, Unfortunately you've accidentally cropped off all the context of whoever's e-mails to which you were responding​. What were you trying to

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 12 November 2014 14:46, Brian Wolff wrote: > On Nov 12, 2014 9:44 AM, "James Forrester" > wrote: > > > > On 8 November 2014 22:01, Brian Wolff wrote: > > > > > Furthermore: find some way to present only the conflicted lines (ie > what > > > conflict markers show in a source control system) i

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 12 November 2014 14:26, Nkansah Rexford wrote: > Indeed Forester, your answer on the wiki research list is outstanding and > shines light on what collaborative editing entails. I really appreciate > pointing those issues out, and I fully agree. > > You ended by saying > > > The short answer is

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

What's the point in being (allegedly) "responsible" of something you can't influence? Nemo ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Nov 12, 2014 9:44 AM, "James Forrester" wrote: > > On 8 November 2014 22:01, Brian Wolff wrote: > > > Honestly i dont think anyone's even tried to improve the conflict screen. > > There's probably a lot of low hanging fruit on the usability of edit > > conflicts which could be persued that hav

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Indeed Forester, your answer on the wiki research list is outstanding and shines light on what collaborative editing entails. I really appreciate pointing those issues out, and I fully agree. You ended by saying > The short answer is that it's a really interesting area of possibilities, > but we'

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 9 November 2014 01:10, Pine W wrote: > It might be worth asking the Editing team if improving the handling of > edit conflicts is something that they have on their agenda or if they can > add it next to their agenda for the next FY, or if this project would be a > good GSOC/OPW project. James

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 8 November 2014 22:12, Nkansah Rexford wrote: > The fact that no one has even tried improving the conflict issue in > simplest way possible for years now is even something a bit strange. > ​It's been suggested before and discarded for the reason I gave; this isn't lacking progress because of

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 8 November 2014 22:01, Brian Wolff wrote: > Honestly i dont think anyone's even tried to improve the conflict screen. > There's probably a lot of low hanging fruit on the usability of edit > conflicts which could be persued that have nothing to do with the hard, > real time editing solutions (

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On 8 November 2014 20:31, Nkansah Rexford wrote: > One session I really looked forward to at the Wikimania was the one on > Visual Editor and the talk on RealTime Editing (the one presented by Erik). > Of course, I enjoyed, seeing some of the nice future goals of how realtime > editing could be p

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

The real-time collaboration mock ups that Pau created and we presented at Wikimania have a feature which is similar, where you can see who else is currently editing a given page (and be notified when another edit starts) even if you don't choose to start/join a collaborative editing session. But e

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

It might be worth asking the Editing team if improving the handling of edit conflicts is something that they have on their agenda or if they can add it next to their agenda for the next FY, or if this project would be a good GSOC/OPW project. James, can you comment? I know you're busy with VE and

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

The fact that no one has even tried improving the conflict issue in simplest way possible for years now is even something a bit strange. On Nov 8, 2014 10:01 PM, "Brian Wolff" wrote: > Honestly i dont think anyone's even tried to improve the conflict screen. > There's probably a lot of low hangin

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Looked for it and found this doc on it: http://codex.wordpress.org/Post_Locking Your points are also valid, at least far better than the current diff system which isn't that easy to understand what is actually going on or whatnot. On Nov 8, 2014 10:01 PM, "Brian Wolff" wrote: > Honestly i dont t

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Honestly i dont think anyone's even tried to improve the conflict screen. There's probably a lot of low hanging fruit on the usability of edit conflicts which could be persued that have nothing to do with the hard, real time editing solutions (as cool as those are). If someone is intrested in tryi

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Rexford, it happens that there are 2 Wikimania sessions about concurrent editing starting at 17:00 today in Auditorum I. Pine On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Quim Gil wrote: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Pine W wrote: > >> I am asking Quim to provide us an update. >> > > Me? :) I'm just an

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Quim Gil wrote: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Pine W wrote: > >> I am asking Quim to provide us an update. >> > > Me? :) I'm just an editor who, like many of you, has suffered this problem > occasionally. > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:02 AM, rupert THURNER >>

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Aug 5, 2014 11:25 PM, "Nkansah Rexford" wrote: > Thanks for the update Quim. I hope it gets done as soon as possible, as > it'll go a long way to help multiple concurrent edits. > > I think it's been lacking for a long time now, and can't wait to see it in > action. I think some test cases are

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Thanks for the update Quim. I hope it gets done as soon as possible, as it'll go a long way to help multiple concurrent edits. I think it's been lacking for a long time now, and can't wait to see it in action. +Rexford | +CG Central

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Pine W wrote: > I am asking Quim to provide us an update. > Me? :) I'm just an editor who, like many of you, has suffered this problem occasionally. On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:02 AM, rupert THURNER > wrote: > >> that would be a hullarious feature! which is btw av

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

Hi Rexford, This is one of many places where feature requests can be made. Thanks for your interest. The last I heard is that tools are in development that will make it easier to edit content simultaneously. I am asking Quim to provide us an update. Pine On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:02 AM, rupert

Re: [Wikitech-l] Feature request.

that would be a hullarious feature! which is btw available in some other opensoure and proprietory wikis. rupert Am 04.08.2014 11:47 schrieb "Nkansah Rexford" : > Hi all, > > I'm Rexford, and just posting here for the first time. Please inform if > this place isn't the right area to suggest featu

Re: [Wikitech-l] feature request: hide left navbar

Andrew: > https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14501 I see. thx ! I agree this to be reopened. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] feature request: hide left navbar

2009/2/6 Michael : > > I don't know if this is already possible. If so, just forget my question. > > Look at the Simple Machines' SMF 1.1.4, they have it implemented, working > example is here: > http://mbreg.de/forum/index.php?action=unreadreplies > > Anyway, i miss this feature since long at wik