On Sep 18, 2007, at 10:17 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
How about two edit boxes: The first one containing
article text, and
location-specific material (including pointers to references, links,
images etc), and the second one containing meta data (reference
bodies, categories, GPS coordinates...)
I don't like this (but I may be in the minority). Wouldn't it be
simpler to implement template expansion inside ref tags in Cite?
Templates are expanded inside ref tags... enwiki has dozens of
{{cite}} templates.
Doh. I think I am confusing myself with a different issue regarding
ref tags and templates. Perhaps it's the other way around?
So... the cite templates could be made even more granular to do
templates for every reference (I'd put these in a different
namespace). The "second edit window" would be invoked by clicking a
link from the list of included templates.
I'm not sure two edit boxes is a good idea, but some kind of <meta>
tag (probably need a different name to avoid confusing with the HTML
meta tag) which can contain all the meta info would be good. Keep it
in the main source code, but separate from the content. It would make
it very easy to modify section editing to allow the meta info to be
edited separately to the rest of the page.
Nothing inbetween <meta> tags would be displayed on the page, which
could simplify things like having to prefix links to categories with a
colon to get them to display. If the category link is in the <meta>
section, it would add the page to the category, if its anywhere else,
it just displays a link (although that would break backwards
compatibility, so might not be worth it).
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
=====================================
Jim Hu
Associate Professor
Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics
2128 TAMU
Texas A&M Univ.
College Station, TX 77843-2128
979-862-4054