I'm going ahead with Modulo:Pg and Modulo:Dati/... idea. A test p.indice
function into :it:s:Modulo:Dati now builds a nice list of links to subpages
into any supported ns0 page - simply browsing one of Modulo/Dati:....
tables and selecting cap objects which are subpages of the calling page and
adding a little bit of wiki code.
But I found a problem while trying to emulate fully our it.source, powerful
tl|Testo, currently used to build links to subpages. A transclusion call by
#lst tag is not considered "server expensive", while a Lua emulation of a
transclusion call by mw.title.new() (to retrieve its content and select
text into a section) is a server expensive function. Is there some other
method to emulate #lst in Lua using not expensive server functions?
Alex
2013/6/8 billinghurst <billinghu...@gmail.com>
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:44:06 +0200, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andre...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, billinghurst <billinghu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I don't agree that it should be fully automated by any stretch of the
> >> imagination. I can see that it is an option that some may wish to use,
> >> but
> >> I dislike the limitations, and do not see it working as the only means
> to
> >> use.
> >>
> >
> > Well, I think that the bot/Lua/extension/whatever could show to the user
> a
> > window with the structure of the book as it would be created.
> > The user could change some things, or Cancel the automatic transclusion.
> >
> > I don't know: to me, avoiding the burden of taking care of different
> > namesapces, with diffirent templates needed and strange tags (eg
> pagelist)
> > should be an aim for us, if we want the layman to understand Wikisource
> and
> > contribute.
> > I myself can't upload and create a whole book from the scan to the ns0
> > transclusion without mistakes or forgetting important things.
> > Wikisource *is* difficult,
> > Too much, IMHO.
> >
> > Aubrey
>
> I am not saying that it isn't part of the choice, I am just saying that it
> should not be enforced. I am explaining choice, not commenting on the
> development of the proposed tool and its availability. At a point of time,
> I may use it. Of course you make mistakes, we all do, and they are not just
> in the <pages> stuff. I make more mistakes in Page: ns than I do in main.
> I see mistakes in the published books, including mistakes in ToC. Humans
> while they make mistakes, also are able to error resolve.
>
> English Wikisource has more components in its headers, and is able to
> adapt its {{header}} components more dynamically. Having the ability to
> tweak enables presentation to how it suits a work, and its readibility; to
> this point of time, I find the automated process too restricting.
>
> Regards, Billinghurst
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
