>> From the standpoint of programmatically detecting a signature, the above
>> could be cleaned up and work well enough.
>>
> Would this mean that if people had a fancy sig, and they changed it,
> it would automatically update everywhere with this magic tag instead
> of just applying to new signatures? (Which might be cool)
> 
> Downside to that you might have some tricky issue where people change
> their sig after the fact to be something malicious (For some
> definition of malicious), and then all the old sigs change without an
> edit to track it and generally be a vehicle for mass vandalism.
> (Didn't that use to be an issue on /. ?)

I haven't looked at the actual patch yet, but based on the discussion
it seems like this code would allow us to update pages if people's
signatures changed?  I too am not sure this is a good idea.

I do though support the idea of wrapping signatures in a <sig>
markup to make it easier to programatically detect them.  That
<sig> markup could be rendered as a span with a class="sig" as well
which allow those who are just scraping the HTML of the page to be
able to detect them as well.

> This also makes working out what the state of the page at time X quite
> hard for things like "Please note that I am being paid to edit by XYZ Inc."
> that come and go from month to month to be seen.

This is one of my biggest concerns as well.

Thank you,
Derric Atzrott


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to