headers
Steve Bennett | 1 Oct 01:53
Picon

Re: Disambiguation while editing

On 10/1/09, Lars Aronsson <lars <at> aronsson.se> wrote:
>  What it would do: From where the cursor stands in the edit box,
>  search backwards for a "[[" and then forwards to the following "|"
>  or "]]" which ever comes first (this covers the case that the
>  cursor is inside the link brackets). Look up that article, show
>  the first paragraph or 150 characters in a pop-up. If I click a
>  link in the pop-up (a top link, or a disambig page), replace the
>  link in the edit box so it points to that article.

Sounds very well described. Would be useful to a lot of people, so if
it gets developed, maybe it should be deployed in the sitewide
javascript?

Steve
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 1 Oct 02:21
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Disambiguation while editing

On 9/30/09 3:37 PM, Lars Aronsson wrote:
> What it would do: From where the cursor stands in the edit box,
> search backwards for a "[[" and then forwards to the following "|"
> or "]]" which ever comes first (this covers the case that the
> cursor is inside the link brackets). Look up that article, show
> the first paragraph or 150 characters in a pop-up. If I click a
> link in the pop-up (a top link, or a disambig page), replace the
> link in the edit box so it points to that article.

I'm pretty sure the usability kids have something to this effect up 
their sleeves, hiding somewhere.

-- brion
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 1 Oct 02:26
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Proposal for editing template calls within pages

On 9/28/09 12:56 PM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
> On that note, what happened to Creole?
> I looked at the Creole wiki some time ago, and I remember a good deal of
> notes on how MediaWiki could handle Creole implementation.
>
> I haven't heard anything about creole on the wikitech list though.

Dead as a doornail; there was never a clear benefit or incentive for 
anyone to move to it. You just end up with different confusing squiggly 
characters, and to get there you've had either an ugly transition or 
some kind of bizarre translation that's likely to break.

If you're going to go through the pain, you should get some tangible 
benefit out of it.

-- brion
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brion Vibber | 1 Oct 02:29
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Proposal for editing template calls within pages

On 9/27/09 4:25 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> Depending on what features are added, exactly, I'd imagine a
> lighter-weight markup language would be more than sufficient.
> Something where you can describe the syntax in less than a page and
> write a correct implementation in half an hour or less would probably
> be good enough.  Like maybe just newline-delimited key=value pairs, or
> something like JSON at worst.

I don't see any point to inventing yet another markup language for 
internal data transfer; I'd much rather use something that:

1) is a known, implemented standard
2) has standard support in PHP
3) has standard support in JavaScript

If you feel the need to describe the syntax, you've already lost time 
and gained nothing. :)

-- brion
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Aryeh Gregor | 1 Oct 02:59
Picon

Re: Proposal for editing template calls within pages

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Brion Vibber <brion <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I don't see any point to inventing yet another markup language for
> internal data transfer; I'd much rather use something that:
>
> 1) is a known, implemented standard
> 2) has standard support in PHP
> 3) has standard support in JavaScript
>
> If you feel the need to describe the syntax, you've already lost time
> and gained nothing. :)

You've gained ease of use, because people don't have to bother
learning how to use their language's standard library for the
language, if it even has one.  Is XML reliably supported in
JavaScript?  And didn't we have problems with PHP on RHEL not
supporting the XML library that was supposed to be standard?

If you can describe the language with a one-line regex, you're using a
parser that's in *every* language out there, and that *every*
programmer should already be familiar with.  Not to mention they could
just copy-paste the regex even if they don't know regex, modulo some
slashes if their language prefers POSIX.  If it can be described by
one or two explode()s (like key=val;val;val), even better.

Of course, this can get ugly if you later want to add more
capabilities to the format, so JSON or YAML might make sense, but XML
is overboard IMO.  I'd use XML for text markup only, if that.

But no point in bikeshedding -- if this gets done, whoever does it
gets to decide the format.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Steve Bennett | 1 Oct 04:30
Picon

Re: Disambiguation while editing

On 10/1/09, Brion Vibber <brion <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the usability kids have something to this effect up
>  their sleeves, hiding somewhere.

Heh, I was wondering if this would start to become the new meme. "We
don't need to fix that gui, the usability team will take care of it!"

You're probably right, of course. I wonder what the best way to double
check these assumptions is.

Steve
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Bence Damokos | 1 Oct 08:03
Picon

Re: Disambiguation while editing

2009/10/1 Lars Aronsson <lars <at> aronsson.se>

>
> In the edit box, when I type [[John Doe]], I want some chance to
> verify that I'm linking to the right article, whether it is a
> disambiguation page, or by seeing the first sentence from that
> article.  I know I can "preview" my edit and click that link to
> see the page (or ctrl-click to make it appear in a new tab), but
> that method just seems sooo 2002.
>
> Is there some tool, button or gadget that does this trick? Perhaps
> some greasemonkey script?
>
> What it would do: From where the cursor stands in the edit box,
> search backwards for a "[[" and then forwards to the following "|"
> or "]]" which ever comes first (this covers the case that the
> cursor is inside the link brackets). Look up that article, show
> the first paragraph or 150 characters in a pop-up. If I click a
> link in the pop-up (a top link, or a disambig page), replace the
> link in the edit box so it points to that article.
>

The Navigation popups[1] has partially a functionality that does these: if
you select a link in the edit box it will display the first part of the
article in a popup; after saving if you hover over a disambig or redirect
link, you can choose to fix it with one click. I don't think it is possible
with it to do this fixing right from the edit box.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Tei | 1 Oct 08:55
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Disambiguation while editing

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Lars Aronsson <lars <at> aronsson.se> wrote:
>
> In the edit box, when I type [[John Doe]], I want some chance to
> verify that I'm linking to the right article,

Humm?

I don't know the wikipedia, but on other wikis is like that:

Fire and forget.  You link [[Mr John Doe]].  Once is published you
notice is not a link, so you click, and make a redirection from [[Mr.
John Doe]] to the existing article [[Doc. John Doe]].

You can also make links that don't exist. Like in "english expression
'[[a pocket full of horses]]'", you don't need to link to articles
that exist.  On a wiki (I don't know wikipedia)  you don't have to
post correct or complete stuff. And having unpopulated links is a
invitation to others to create more articles or redirections.

I know Wikipedia has always been a strange wiki, so maybe thats not
how it works. I hate wikipedia a bit.

Also, the creation of a redirection from  [[Doc John Doe]] and [[John
Doe]] to  [[Dr John Doe]] is content. Maybe a dude could be googling
"Doc John" and find the redirection one. Is a happy "error" that these
redirections are created.

--

-- 
--
ℱin del ℳensaje.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Andre Engels | 1 Oct 09:17
Picon

Re: Disambiguation while editing

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Tei <oscar.vives <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Lars Aronsson <lars <at> aronsson.se> wrote:
>>
>> In the edit box, when I type [[John Doe]], I want some chance to
>> verify that I'm linking to the right article,
>
> Humm?
>
> I don't know the wikipedia, but on other wikis is like that:

(snip)

The issue was about disambiguations, that is, the case where one term
has two meanings. [[John Doe]] may lead you to an article about
another person than you intended to, but with the same name. Or to a
page only specifying that there are several people by that name, and
giving you links to the various articles.

--

-- 
André Engels, andreengels <at> gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Roan Kattouw | 1 Oct 12:22
Picon

Re: Disambiguation while editing

2009/10/1 Brion Vibber <brion <at> wikimedia.org>:
> I'm pretty sure the usability kids have something to this effect up
> their sleeves, hiding somewhere.
>
Sort of. We have a link insertion dialog that shows title suggestions
and page existence status as you type in our Babaco release, which
should be deployed very soon, and we have ideas about adding a link
preview to that dialog. We originally envisaged "link preview" to mean
a preview of what the actual link looks like, but having a preview of
the linked-to page, if it exists, sounds like an interesting idea.
I've forwarded the original post to the rest of our team, and I'll
point them to the rest of this thread as well.

Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane