On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Platonides <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think it would be wise to add that for anonymous users. > People could be seeing drafts from other people and we would be unable > to assist or even verify reports of things that people see that their > coworkers are writing.
So? > They could benefit from drafts, but in that case better to do it on the > browser itself. I don't see a practical difference between that and using cookies here (except, e.g., DB read-only). > IMHO we still need some kind of saving into firefox > storage, for cases like a read-only db. Instead of 'You can't save, the > site is read-only'->'Save-draft'->'No, you can't, the db is read-only', > 'You can't save, the site is read-only'->'Save-draft'->'The site is > read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'. This can be done in cutting-edge browsers using HTML5's localStorage and sessionStorage. > A completely different approach could be to allow anyone to view other's > drafts. As a new feature, it could be accepted as it is, without > treating it as a completely privacy section. Normal wikipedians won't > mind of people seeing the article as they're writing in. However, the > auto-save-draft may conflict with it. I'd be completely behind this, now that you mention it. It's like how we don't allow private discussions between users (except by e-mail, okay). We should be encouraging transparency at every step of using the software. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
