On 12-02-06 10:15 AM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote: > I am forwarding below a response from Oliver Keyes, who isn't on this list. > > Hey guys > Sumana asked me to chip in; most of the arguments that can be made have > already been typed up by people like Trevor, but I thought I'd go into a > bit more detail and provide some links for those of you who want to do > slightly deeper reading. > > I'm not commenting on the pros or cons of redoing the underlying > wikimarkup; that's a technical issue, and I'm not a technical person. > What I *am* is a community engagement person - and Pavel's line that > intelligent people can parse markup languages is pretty well within my > bailiwick . > > The problem with this line is that it has the potential to turn into a > "true scotsman" argument. Pavel, you're clearly both an intelligent and > a technical man - but not all intelligence is of the same, > technically-minded type, and it's not always backed up by pertinent and > complex knowledge. I'm sure that you, were you a new editor, would be > able to quickly parse our syntax inside your head. However, you're > someone who is technically proficient and knows a lot of the background > to markup languages, and most people - indeed, most *intelligent* people > - simply aren't. > > It wasn't always the case. Early and mid-term adopters of the internet > (I count myself as the latter, having first got online circa 1999) were > technically proficient, could probably code, and would certainly be able > to deal with not only our markup languages but markup languages generally. > This isn't necessarily because they were more intelligent than anyone > else, though; this is because the structure of the internet at that time > penalised anyone who *wasn't* technical; websites and communications > methods expected a degree of technical proficiency. > > Today that isn't the case. Site after site after site have realised that > instituting technical barriers to participation artificially limits your > audience and volunteers, and have introduced WYSIWYG editors in some > way, shape or form. The result is that the generation of intelligent > people we're dealing with now is not the generation of early and > mid-level adopters we all know, love and are members of; it's the > Facebook generation: people who have come to expect that the barriers to > participating will be low, easy to comprehend, and simple to bypass. And > because they've come to expect this, and the internet has indulged this, > they don't necessarily have the technical knowledge or background to > parse markup languages in the same way that members of this list might. > > Of course, it's a mistake to think that just because someone is young > they won't be technical - we have a lot of great, technically minded > volunteers. Similarly, it's a mistake to think that just because someone > is older they will be. For some cases-in-point, I recommend the > usability studies the Foundation ran a couple of years ago - there are > some great examples at > http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usability,_Experience,_and_Evaluation_Study#General_Editing_Issuesand > http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usability_and_Experience_Study#Wiki_Syntax_is_not_that_hard_to_ignore_.28in_small_doses.29 > > The simple fact of the matter is this: editing is complex and technical > and we are not, as experienced people, necessarily qualified to say what > the general population can or cannot do, because *we are not the general > population*. The people qualified to tell us what gen pop feels > comfortable doing and what gen pop expects of websites are, well, gen > pop. And they've spoken, through the usability initiative and just about > every conversation I've had with a reader, and, I'm sure, a heck-load of > conversations other contractors and staffers have had too. The > complexity of our existing markup language is a barrier, but not as much > as the presence of any markup language whatsoever as a default. > > I appreciate this is a bit TL:DR, and as I'm not really subscribed to > this list I'm unlikely to see responses unless Sumana is kind enough to > act as my gopher . If you want to chat more about the philosophical > and cultural underpinnings of usability rather than the technical, I'm > always up for a natter; [email protected]
Oliver Keyes: I do not believe anyone is disputing your general arguments, above. The concern I see being expressed, fundamentally, is "I have developed skills, practices, and efficiencies with current Wiki syntax. Is your new parser going to destroy my investments in learning? am I going to have to start over with this new system?" As I understand it, for the foreseeable future there will be a raw wiki syntax interface available. I hope contributors can be reassured on this point. Amgine _______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
