headers
Toby Bartels | 1 Jul 2003 17:14
Favicon

Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

The Cunctator wrote:

>This whole discussion REALLY should be taking place on the wikipedia-l list.
>Unilateral, unilateral.

So for people that haven't been reading <wikitech-L>:

You saw an announcement a few days ago
that there's discussion on <wikitech-L>
about implementing a category scheme in Erik's style.
For the most part, that discussion hasn't impacted policy --
you may or may not like /Erik's/ style of categories,
but that's what's being implemented now on that list.

However, one discussion of policy has recently come up.
That's over whether to allow links from article [[Z]]
to section [[#Y]] in article [[X]], through the markup "[[X#Y]]";
or whether to allow links only from the same article [[X]],
through the markup "[[#Y]]".

So if you care about that (and it's generated heat before!),
then go over to <wikitech-L> and read what people have said.
(In particular, understand that the technically simplest coding
will automatically make both sorts of links work.)
Then discuss it wherever you feel is best.

-- Toby
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 1 Jul 2003 19:18
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

Toby Bartels wrote:

>However, one discussion of policy has recently come up.
>That's over whether to allow links from article [[Z]]
>to section [[#Y]] in article [[X]], through the markup "[[X#Y]]";
>or whether to allow links only from the same article [[X]],
>through the markup "[[#Y]]".
>
We have allowed such links since nearly a year ago, but you had to make 
an anchor yourself by putting in some HTML tag with an 'id="anchorname"' 
attribute.

The discussion is whether to automatically _create_ anchors from 
headers, which is needed for Erik's proposed automatic table of contents 
generation for pages with more than three headers.

The anchor names would change if the header text is changed, so if a 
header is changed, a link specifically to it will end up just going to 
the whole article instead of that section specifically.

-- brion vibber (brion  <at>  pobox.com)
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Daniel Mayer | 1 Jul 2003 19:51
Picon
Favicon

Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

brion vibber wrote:
>We have allowed such links since nearly 
>a year ago, but you had to make an anchor 
>yourself by putting in some HTML tag with 
>an 'id="anchorname"' attribute.

Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?

>The discussion is whether to automatically 
>_create_ anchors from headers, which is 
>needed for Erik's proposed automatic table 
>of contents generation for pages with more 
>than three headers.

Heavens no! That would be ugly and non-standard and should not be a default 
setting (in the same way as the almost as ugly auto header numbering is not 
the default). 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 1 Jul 2003 20:21
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

Daniel Mayer wrote:

>brion vibber wrote:
>  
>
>>We have allowed such links since nearly 
>>a year ago, but you had to make an anchor 
>>yourself by putting in some HTML tag with 
>>an 'id="anchorname"' attribute.
>>    
>>
>
>Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?
>
A good question. Opposition to having a standard wiki syntax for 
creating anchors was and remains driven by opposition to overlong 
articles, which are difficult to edit and maintain.

Erik has also created a feature whereby you can edit particular 
subsections of a page more easily, so this may be less of a factor.

Of course, there are plenty of times when we do have long pages, which 
aren't necessarily articles; among others, the Village Pump and many 
popular talk pages become HUUUGE as many discussions bump on through. 
It's sometimes useful to point people to specific elements of 
discussion. Or, we could be more vigilant about breaking them up -- into 
subpages. :)

>>The discussion is whether to automatically 
>>_create_ anchors from headers, which is
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Richard Grevers | 1 Jul 2003 23:44
Picon

Re: Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:51:15 -0700, Daniel Mayer
<maveric149@...> gave 
utterance to the following:

> brion vibber wrote:
>> We have allowed such links since nearly a year ago, but you had to make 
>> an anchor yourself by putting in some HTML tag with an 'id="anchorname"' 
>> attribute.
>
> Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?
>
Because we have (whether you like them or not) articles such as 
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation%2C_aerospace_and_aeronautical_terms
which help reduce the number of stub articles and are much easier to follow 
than the equivalent wiktionary article (just look at the disambiguation 
article for [[pitch]].
In fact - links to disambign articles are a perfect use. You can make it 
clear what sense of a word you are linking to.

--

-- 
Richard Grevers
I can't march any more the soldier said haltingly
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Menchi Zh-En WP | 2 Jul 2003 04:40
Picon
Favicon

Re: Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

>From: Daniel Mayer

>brion vibber wrote:
> >...you had to make an anchor
> >yourself by putting in some HTML tag with
> >an 'id="anchorname"' attribute.
>
>Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?

Because that'd make some permanent one-paragraph or one-sentence stubs on 
things humankind know little about. Some articles I made refers to another 
parts of sections of its own or other articles.

> >...automatically _create_ anchors from headers...
>
>Heavens no! That would be ugly and non-standard and should not be a default
>setting (in the same way as the almost as ugly auto header numbering is not
>the default).

It doesn't have to be default at all, as apparent from the Korean NoSmoke 
WikiForum, for example, on my page ( http://no-smok.net/nsmk/Menchi ), I 
used several levels of headers, but the index can _only_ be revealled by the 
markup, [[TableOfContents]].

Menchi Zh-En

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 2 Jul 2003 08:48
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Enhanced special page links (in testing)

It's been oft complained that it's difficult to link to various special 
functions -- backlinks, contribs, and the like -- which might be nice. I 
made a quick hack to allow tacking a parameter onto a special page in a 
wikilink, like so:

[[Special:Contributions/User name]]

[[Special:Whatlinkshere/Page title]]

[[Special:Recentchangeslinked/Page title]]

etc

See some examples and try it out at on the test wiki at 
http://test.wikipedia.org/

The slash (/) doesn't have to be the separator character; if people find 
it offensive I'm sure we could change it to something else. :) A(nother) 
colon may or may not be preferable.

An advantage that a variant on this scheme has over the experimental 
interwiki prefixes Erik put in a bit ago ([[BackLinks:foo]] etc) is that 
it will require no additional per-wiki maintenance, and can be used 
across existing interwiki links (once set up on the live wikis), eg: 
[[DeWikipedia:Spezial:Contributions/Eloquence]] would work from English 
Wikipedia, or even from other unrelated wikis so long as they support 
the DeWikipedia prefix.*

A disadvantage (so far) is that since history & editing don't go through 
special pages, they'll need a little more work to set up on a similar
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Karl Eichwalder | 2 Jul 2003 09:23
Picon

Re: Intro for readers of this list

Daniel Mayer <maveric149@...> writes:

> Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?

Because we write for readers.  Some subjects are more complex and it is
a real pain if you as a reader are force to download a bunch of
articles to get the idea of the subject in question.

Also people will start adding stuff to article which are "not
complete" (they will not lookup other articles first); thus duplicating
of info usually happens and in the end the article is long again.

This leads to the conclusion that fragment identifiers are a good thing.

--

-- 
                                                         |      ,__o
http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/                            |    _-\_<,
ke@... (work) / keichwa <at> gmx.net (home)               |   (*)/'(*)
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Erik Moeller | 2 Jul 2003 19:22
Picon
Picon

Please help test new features

The following features are currently tested on
        http://test.wikipedia.org :

* Automatic table of contents. A TOC-table is added to pages that contain  
more than three headings. This table links to the individual sections  
within the article and hopefully makes navigation easier.
* Editing of individual sections. You need to be logged in to test this.  
Just click the "[edit]" link next to a headline to change the text of that  
particular section.
* Linking into the Special: namespace with parameters. See Brion's  
separate mail for details.

Please help us test these features before we put them on the live server,  
otherwise, things might break unexpectably.

Thanks,

Erik
Permalink | Reply | 45 comments |
headers
Timwi | 2 Jul 2003 20:19
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Please help test new features


I could find the following problems:

> * Automatic table of contents. A TOC-table is added to pages that
>   contain more than three headings. This table links to the individual
>   sections within the article and hopefully makes navigation easier.

The TOC is invalid HTML for two major reasons:
* The top-level LI elements are not enclosed in an UL or OL
* The child ULs are outside the parent LIs.

> * Editing of individual sections. You need to be logged in to test
>   this. Just click the "[edit]" link next to a headline to change the
>   text of that particular section.

The [edit] link does not display when you're logged out, but when you 
log in it is set as a default. This is potentially confusing to users. 
Settings should not change by creating an account :-)

> * Linking into the Special: namespace with parameters. See Brion's
>   separate mail for details.

Seems to work great! :-)

Greetings,
Timwi
Permalink | Reply | 19 comments |

Gmane