On 4/17/07, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 17/04/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Tim Starling <tstarling(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > What I propose is to introduce a new prefix called "download", which
will
> > replace "media" for cases where downloading is really what is
desired. For
> > example:
> >
> > [[download:Foo.doc|Click here to download the text as an MS Word document]]
Introducing a new keyword to better reflect the action makes sense.
Altering the meaning of "media:" is a bad idea, as old documentation
becomes bad advice. If it does go ahead at that name, I hope that the
software upgrade with automate the migration of all media: to
download:
Is it
necessary to have two keywords? Consider the case of an image:
It displays as a thumbnail, but if you click it, you can then download
the full sized image. To get straight on with downloading it, you use
[[:Image:Foo.jpg]].
Er, no you don't. That just makes a link to the image page. "To get
straight on with downloading it", you do [[media:Foo.jpg]].
I like Steve's suggestion of overloading existing conventions rather
than introduce new ones, if possible. Firstly, what is wrong with
using [[Image:Blah.mov|200px...]]?
Alternatively, could we use {{Media:Blah.mov}} to do the inclusion?
There are three things. (attempting) displaying the
item inline,
making a text link to the item page (i.e. pages in the Image:
namespace currently), and making a text link to the item itself.
Anyway +1 for anything that improves any media support. Wikisource
might also have some ideas about how to improve wikisyntax as they use
DjVU fies, and ditto Wiktionary with audio.
Is there a
MediaWiki.org page that describes the "true audio and video
support" being discussed.
--
John