Ya, that's probably a fact of matter to. Unfortunately, once you go
anywhere past {{#if:...|...|...}} you hit that mark and it becomes hard
for most users to use.
To help with that part one of the tags I'm planning on deriving is the
<esc></esc> which escapes things like the | used in Tables to bypass a
level of ParserFunctions. The idea being that sticking a <esc></esc>
inside of an #if leaves the normal user with much more readability on
their end when working with things like an Infobox than they would have
working with the {{!}} template. ((Btw: Do you have any idea of a good
tag name we can alias to <esc></esc> to make it so that even normal
users can understand what it's supposed to do?))
Some of the syntax additions to functions like #expr: were thought up
also to try and make mathematical stuff inside of Templates you can't
avoid a little more readable.
We have various extensions like ParserFunctions, StringFunctions, and
DPL already on Wikia for use. Some are able to understand them, and
others don't. Not every wiki has users who can work using any sort of
ParserFunction and so they end up using just the basic stuff.
But for the wiki that do have a few users who can work with the
technical stuff, they have an option that takes advantages of the
technical stuff, while making templates generally usable. True, some
can't edit the technical templates. But the potential idea is two
things. Firstly, being able to code a template in a way that there is no
need for anyone to recode it (A #foreach inside of {{See also}} would
allow for the template to autonomously expand, without a user needing to
understand the repeat syntax to figure out how to expand it when they
need it.). And secondly, letting more of the complex stuff be moved into
Templates, and have less of them out on the articles and pages that
normal users edit.
The purpose which I primarily use things like StringFunctions for, is
for a method of using complex syntax in templates such as an infobox for
example (Which doesn't change much since syntax is already complex there
no matter what you do), so that the user does not need to input complex
stuff.
A contribution to that idea, is the iBox system I've been working on.
The idea behind that one is a method of making it easier for a general
user to create an infobox.
Which is more editable?
This:
http://en.anime.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template:Infobox/Animanga/Anime&action=edit
Or this:
http://en.anime.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_test/Animanga/Anime&action=edit
Also, for things like the genre tag. Rather than having the user input a
complex set of syntax and try and get them to understand everything:
(Take a look at Wikipedia's for example)
|genre=[[Harem anime|Harem]], [[Action genre|Action]], [[Comedy]],
[[Ecchi]], [[Supernatural]], [[Romantic love|Romance]]
With at the bottom of the page: [[Category:Fantasy anime and
manga]][[Category:Romance anime and
manga]][[Category:Sho-nen]][[Category:Harem anime and manga]]
But on the Animepedia: | genre = Harem, Action, Comedy,
Ecchi, Sho-nen, Supernatural
As for the complexity of StringFunction syntax, I'm going to be doing
something similar to what I did with iBox, to create a general set of
templates you can just drop in to get complex additions to an infobox.
Things like auto linking and adding a category, etc...
~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of:
-The Gaiapedia (http://gaia.wikia.com)
-Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG)
-and Wiki-Tools.com (http://wiki-tools.com)
sannse wrote:
I think the problem here is this is just too complicated! I have a
great deal of trouble following these complex templates and functions,
and I think it's fair to say I'm an experienced user of MediaWiki.
For people with less time using wikis, it must be even more
complicated.
I can understand that advanced functions are useful for some users
with specific goals in mind, but there comes a point when the
complexity of the code becomes more of a problem than the issue you
are trying to fix. Any less technically minded user will look at the
code and be totally flummoxed. They won't be able to get the same
effect on their own templates or to make changes to existing ones,
they will be frustrated and put off.
When wiki markup gets to this point, maybe it's better to consider how
the same functionality can be given in a way that works without the
complexity. Is there a way that it can be moved to an extension that
can be used simply? Or, is this a case where the problems outweigh
the benefits and we simply don't provide this functionality?
I don't want to limit the technically minded from getting the effects
they want, but the beauty of wikis has always been captured in the
phrase "anyone can edit". There are more ways of preventing that than
by protecting pages.
-- sannse
On Dec 11, 2007 7:01 AM, DanTMan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've started a discussion and a WikiPage on this topic now. I'd love
feedback from the Wikia community on what functions are useful or wanted
from other extension, or what functionality or ease of use syntax could be
added.
The discussion is here:
http://inside.wikia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=133
Remember, the idea isn't turning WikiText into a programming language, but
making the current esoteric syntax easier to use, and adding more features
and usability.
~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of:
-The Gaiapedia (http://gaia.wikia.com)
-Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG)
-and Wiki-Tools.com (http://wiki-tools.com)
DanTMan wrote:
I did a little mockup on Community Test explaining the usefulness of Looping
Functions.
http://communitytest.wikia.com/wiki/LoopFunctions_usefulness_example
I know most people don't think that WikiText should be considered a
programming language, but I would also think that anything that can make
template and article syntax more simplified should be reviewed.
Though, I do think that most of the implementations are lacking. I'm
probably considering reviewing all of them (ParserFunctions, ParserFunctions
(extended), StringFunctions, LoopFunctions, Control Structure Functions,
Character Escapes, and RegexParserFunctions), and creating an extension
which combines the usefulness of all of them, but while working better with
the syntax, and still making it backwards compatible with wiki like Wikia
which is already using some of the extensions and would have issues
installing some of the others for compatibility reasons.
Would anyone consider such an extension good for use on Wikia?
My first question is on the subject of character escapes. LoopFunctions,
and also in the case of tables, any type of ParserFunctions do have issues
with syntax of things because of the nature of ParserFunctions. There are
multiple ways to do escapes. I'm probably going to add the <esc></esc>
function from Character Escapes in, but that doesn't work on it's own,
sometimes you need an alternate set of escapes. However there are multiple
forms, and I'd like to know what the community thinks of them.
...
So I would half to say that it does improve the ability to do stuff, and
kills function parsing and template overhead in many ways.
--
~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of:
-The Gaiapedia (http://gaia.wikia.com)
-Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG)
-and Wiki-Tools.com (http://wiki-tools.com)
________________________________
_______________________________________________
Wikia-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikia-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikia-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikia-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikia-l
