Then there no such discussion should take place. Toolserver is a host of more or less multi-wikipedia tools, differentiating domain names for used databases is awkward and weird.
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Maciej Jaros <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul Selitskas (2010-12-29 23:25): >> That's extremely the wrong way of discussion. The initial question >> was, as I suppos, if there could be created rewrite rule to change >> thrid domain name with something like '?uselang=$1'. Such a radical >> "improvement" is unnecessary. > > It doesn't matter how it will be used (I mean the subdomain) > pl.wikipedia.org means I'm going to Polish Wikipedia articles not that > I'm using Polish interface. > >> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Maciej Jaros<[email protected]> wrote: >>> DaB. (2010-12-29 22:21): >>>> Hello, >>>> At Wednesday 29 December 2010 22:10:53 DaB. wrote: >>>>> the problem is, that one wants to give consistent links to others. When >>>>> you're not able to give a link, which points to the same page (in the >>>>> same language), thats not very user friendly I think. Of course the >>>>> header field should be used when toolserver.org or www.toolserver.org is >>>>> the host and may redirect to en.toolserver.org or de.toolserver.org >>>>> regarding to the language preferences. >>>> yes, that's the problem, but the way arround. If I give a link like >>>> http://en.toolserver.org/~auser/atool.php to another user the GUI will be >>>> in >>>> english – no matter if the user speaks english, his accept-header is >>>> english >>>> or anything. >>>> Also the way to specify the language in a third-level-domain is VERY >>>> uncommon >>>> (wikipedia does it and a few hardware-sellers like IBM or dell) – the users >>>> are accustomed to change the first-level-domain (google.de for german >>>> google, >>>> google.fr for french google, google.it for italian etc. pp.). >>> It's also not standard for Wikipedia. If I go to de.wikipedia.org I see >>> interface in language I've chosen in preferences (which happens to be >>> Polish). The difference is not the interface (which to my understanding >>> we are talking about), the difference is the active database. You would >>> have to add the ability to change the database and the interface >>> language anyway. >>> >>> Anyway how would it be possible to make toolserver users to use one >>> common method for i10n? There is no suggested framework there aren't >>> even any suggested templates for a page (by which I mean a common layout). >>> >>> Regards, >>> Nux. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Toolserver-l mailing list ([email protected]) >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l >>> Posting guidelines for this list: >>> https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Toolserver-l mailing list ([email protected]) > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l > Posting guidelines for this list: > https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette -- З павагай, Павел Селіцкас/Paul Selitskas Wizardist @ Wikimedia projects [email protected], +375257408304 Skype: p.selitskas _______________________________________________ Toolserver-l mailing list ([email protected]) https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l Posting guidelines for this list: https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette
