On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
the wiki syntax must go away,
{{citation needed}}
and will go away.
{{citation needed}}
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
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
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
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
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.
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,
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.
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.)
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
18 matches
Mail list logo
