Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread MZMcBride
Erik Moeller wrote: I'm not seeing any developer contract time allocated to GLAM tooling work yet. At the same time I'm seeing reports of breakage and missing functionality in important tools running in Labs. To the extent that this breakage is due to Labs infrastructure or access to data, it's

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Kim Bruning
I spotted this article linked from news.ycombinator.com, arguing -well- what it says on the tin. ;-) Apologies if someone else already posted a link. https://medium.com/@MrJamesFisher/wikipedia-needs-an-ide-not-a-wysiwyg-editor-7acd85b582c8 I'm not sure scratches head. Well, if we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, There are several issues and imho the one Erik mentions is crucial. When no money is intended for GLAM tool related work, nothing will happen. The situation will remain one where everybody is eying each other... are you going to make a move ... are you? If you are all for a comprehensive

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Thank goodness this wasn't written five years ago, otherwise somebody could get the awful idea to implement it. בתאריך 25 באוק 2014 18:26, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl כתב: I spotted this article linked from news.ycombinator.com, arguing -well- what it says on the tin. ;-) Apologies if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Oct 25, 2014 6:17 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote: Thank goodness this wasn't written five years ago, otherwise somebody could get the awful idea to implement it. Having a side by side really time wikitext - display doesn't sound like an aweful idea at all to me. I'm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Andy Mabbett
On 25 October 2014 15:09, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote: I spotted this article linked from news.ycombinator.com, arguing -well- what it says on the tin. ;-) Apologies if someone else already posted a link.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Because, even though I'm well aware of the fact that lots of experienced wikipedians love wiki syntax, the wiki syntax must go away, and will go away. Maybe in five years, maybe ten, maybe twenty. But it will go away. Investing effort in an IDE for it is pointless. Templates are, indeed,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
MZMcBride, 25/10/2014 16:16: But again, the focus would be integrating into the Wikimedia technical platform and fixing issues in production, rather than trying to make Labs scripts and tools better. False dichotomy IMHO. Usual example:* https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/42259 Quite clearly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread MZMcBride
Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: MZMcBride, 25/10/2014 16:16: But again, the focus would be integrating into the Wikimedia technical platform and fixing issues in production, rather than trying to make Labs scripts and tools better. False dichotomy IMHO. Usual example:*

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Vira Motorko
I'm not very confident to say the author is completely right/wrong but the words the IDE would update display the source and the HTML together, and update the HTML inrealtime. Source on the left, HTML on the right. ​made me feel interested. If wikitext editor could display and update the result

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Oct 25, 2014 7:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote: Because, even though I'm well aware of the fact that lots of experienced wikipedians love wiki syntax, the wiki syntax must go away, and will go away. Maybe in five years, maybe ten, maybe twenty. But it will go away.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Perpetuating it with a dedicated IDE wouldn't help it go away. בתאריך 25 באוק 2014 20:51, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com כתב: On Oct 25, 2014 7:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote: Because, even though I'm well aware of the fact that lots of experienced

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Oct 25, 2014 8:03 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote: Perpetuating it with a dedicated IDE wouldn't help it go away. I doubt that. Side by side wikitext and result, making you see the result of either in the other in real time could help adoption of wysiwyg techniques,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread quiddity
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 25 October 2014 15:09, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote: [...] https://medium.com/@MrJamesFisher/wikipedia-needs-an-ide-not-a-wysiwyg-editor-7acd85b582c8 Quite apart from other issues, the author

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Mark
On 10/25/14, 7:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: Because, even though I'm well aware of the fact that lots of experienced wikipedians love wiki syntax, the wiki syntax must go away, and will go away. Maybe in five years, maybe ten, maybe twenty. But it will go away. Investing effort in an IDE for it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Lila Tretikov
Keep in mind that the projects on Y are brainstorms/seeds -- so it is important to keep that in perspective. By the time they've evolved they often look radically different. That said I think there is kernel of truth there. Our components solve often every problem with one solution. We do need a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Oh, it will remain, just internally. Maybe some day it will be replaced with pure XML, but that day is far away, and by the time it happens editors aren't supposed to care. (That's just me fantasizing; Parsoid people may have a different idea.) -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
People Who Are Able to Edit Articles But Not to Code dismiss wiki syntax much more than I do. Most of them don't even bother to begin to understand it. The few who do are a rare exception. A wiki syntax IDE will not go a long way, as the article says, in helping them edit. They will still be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Mark
I haven't had that experience with lightweight markup around here. The humanities, journalism, and creative-writing academics are the ones who seem to be the most enthusiastic adopters of Markdown in particular. It's taking off quite a bit as part of a simplify/concentrate movement, where

[Wikimedia-l] new Math options: phrasing the preferences

2014-10-25 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
As a follow-up to the discussions about the new Math rendering options, I'd like to raise the question of how to write the preferences in way that will really be helpful to the users. I made a little patch at https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/167024/ It only fixes some minor things, and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 10/25/2014 03:38 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: (That's just me fantasizing; Parsoid people may have a different idea.) Parsoid, AFAIK, represents marked up articles as very strict HTML with Mediawiki-specific attributes - exactly what is needed to maintain a sane and consistent machine readable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
quiddity, 25/10/2014 20:26: We don't have HTML preview, which might be interesting. Surely it's possible to whip up a userscript for it, if anyone would actually find it massively useful. (Or, we can just leave the browser's own Web Developer bar open to see the HTML. ctrl-f is our friend.)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 10/25/2014 01:50 PM, MZMcBride wrote: [...] that probably doesn't mean investing in Labs, exactly. Not if you want to have a long-term, substantive impact, in my opinion. I'd like to address that particular recurrent canard here, if I may. Things that reside in labs are empathically /not/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia needs an IDE, not a WYSIWYG editor

2014-10-25 Thread quiddity
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: quiddity, 25/10/2014 20:26: We don't have HTML preview, which might be interesting. Surely it's possible to whip up a userscript for it, if anyone would actually find it massively useful. (Or, we can just leave

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapters and GLAM tooling

2014-10-25 Thread Erik Moeller
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 7:16 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Labs is a playground and Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums are serious enough to warrant a proper investment of resources, in my view. Magnus and many others develop magnificent tools, but my sense is that they're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] new Math options: phrasing the preferences

2014-10-25 Thread Gabriel Wicke
Amir, On 10/25/2014 01:16 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: As a follow-up to the discussions about the new Math rendering options, I'd like to raise the question of how to write the preferences in way that will really be helpful to the users. I made a little patch at