Thanks everyone for comments!
I must tell that development of this idea will be regardless of proposal
results, possibly with less functions however.
So feel free to post your suggestions on project discussion page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/MediawikiFS
This not only about MediawikiFS but more about your vision of Mediawiki
IDE? How you think it should looks like? Which features should be
implemented?
Especially, i am interested in feedback of people working close with
Semantic Mediawiki extension and writing a lot of html inside wiki
templates.
My other answers are inline:
23.09.2013 6:33, Tim Starling пишет:
We already have http://wikipediafs.sourceforge.net/ for that.
Presumably if a lot of people wanted this feature, there would be more
downloads from SourceForge:
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/wikipediafs/files/stats/timeline?dates=2013-01-01+to+2013-09-23>
-- Tim Starling
Its great that another idea realization exists! T:) ( by the way its
hard to find it in google :D ). However, i found that WikipediaFS have
no Mediawiki API utilization, and based on get/post.
Unfortunately on my Ubuntu it not working properly, maybe i do something
wrong, but can not examine it more than looking at sources.
Another big point - it is only for linux.
23.09.2013 18:47, Gale Andrews пишет:>
>
> Perhaps the fact there is no Windows support has something to
> do with the low number of downloads?
>
Sure, i think we can not ignore statistics:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm
I am sure there is both a lot of Windows and Linux users who maintain
Mediawiki sites.
23.09.2013 20:20, Mark A. Hershberger пишет:
>
> Editors and IDEs can be extended to use the API to edit files as well.
> I maintain the Emacs extension to do this
> (https://launchpad.net/mediawiki-el) and it works fairly well.
> ...
> The filesystem approach has some advantages, but it doesn't support
> versioning and everything else. The content of the article is only one
> piece of the picture.
>
I agree that editor support is good thing, but i believe file-system
approach have more advantages than can be seen at first sight.
Сoncretely, with versioning, why virtual fs can not support it? I think
it can very well.
24.09.2013 20:06, Yury Katkov пишет:
> I like MediaWiki IDE part in your proposal but I think that you have
> to rather concentrate on different features:
>
> * Improving the existing syntax highlighting schemas for MediaWiki
> markup. I saw that several editors have highlighting but it's
> incomplete
> * Indentation. This is probably insolvable problem but without
> indentation the templates look horrible
> * Autocompletion
> * Autocompletion of parser function parameters,
> * Autocompletion of template parameters,
> * Autocompletion of page names, template names, category names,
> {{MAGIC WORDS}}, __OTHER MAGIC WORDS__ : there is a lot of stuff to
> autocomplete!
> * Renaming and replacing. Presently I use MassEditRegex extension but
> it's a minimum! It can't even undo its changes!
> * Brace detection. Something to ease this nightmare with single and
> double brackets, double braces and triple braces.
> -----
> Yury Katkov, WikiVote
>
I agree that friendly markup editing and especially code-editing (SMW,
html in templates) is very important for Mediawiki. This case should be
try to solve via Mediawiki IDE idea, integrated with MediawikiFS.
24.09.2013 22:51, Nico Frieling пишет:
> Hi Alexey,
> can see some potential in it, but am still not sure, what to think
about it.
>
> Anyway, the late SMW+ had an extension called RichMedia ->
>
http://sourceforge.net/projects/halo-extension/files/SMWHalo%201.7.0/SMW%2B%
> 20Extension%20Suite/ which implemented - amongst other features -WebDAV
> access. Maybe it can serve as inspiration to you?
>
> Kind regards
> Argi
Thank you, i got some inspiration from SMW+ code :D
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
