I like also the idea of more than one click to go from yellow to green. > I also would like to repeat my question about the Visual Editor: are we close tho that or nobody is working on it? Sadly nobody is working on it: I have not moved forward on it since London hackathon and nobody else have started to work on it. I won't commit to do it anytime soon. I don't have the free month to work on it fulltime and it is definitly not a task you do during evenings or week-ends.
Cheers, Thomas Le 14 août 2015 6:46 AM, "Andrea Zanni" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:06 PM, zdzislaw <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In the view mode of the yellow Pages (sic! :-)), we can add the "Thin >> (but long) Green Button" (TGB) described: "I read and carefully compared >> the contents with the scan - there's no mistakes." :) Users who "DO read >> our books" (and they do not want / do not have time / skills... to edit) >> click on this button and simply go to the view mode of the next page. Such >> a click would be counted (extra field in the mw database), but did not >> cause an immediate change of the Page status. If for a given page will be >> counted three??, four?? such clicks (this amount would have to have the >> ability to configure for each WS - community could determine their "quality >> threshold" - for "one click" it will became into BGB), then the Page status >> would change automatically from "yellow" to "green". Of course, it would be >> also configurable, to whom show TGB (ip, registered, autopotrolled ...). >> Such a solution would have be implemented directly in the proofread >> extension. >> "TGB" would allow adjustment of the level of "quality" and would be >> acceptable by most the community. If it is true that " a lot of users DO >> read our books," even for 5-4 "clicks" the status would change quickly. >> >> > I do like this approach, and I'd love to see some tests. > I really believe that is good to do tests and experiments, as we are > sometimes convinced by things that are not really proven. > > A 3 step validation passage as you suggest could maybe be easy enough for > new users and casual readers, and we could gain some validations we could > not have had otherwise. > > > I also would like to repeat my question about the Visual Editor: are we > close tho that or nobody is working on it? > > Aubrey > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
