On 8/14/07, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It still requires effort for us to work into the
interface. And it's
going (as far as I understand) to require users to go to a different
Picnik actually recommends that you make it a frame or otherwise embed
the Picnik bit inside the host site (Mediawiki).
site, when we could with not too much more difficulty
implement much
of the same functionality ourselves. Plus yes, we do indeed have a
I'm not convinced of that. Designing good user interfaces is hard. You
really think we can produce anything close to Picnik?
bias against using proprietary software with
Wikipedia, if we can
avoid it. In the case of databases of real-world information, the
only good sources are in many cases commercial and proprietary (for
now), so we don't have much of a choice. But for software, why should
we settle for closed-source when we can without too much more
difficulty use an open-source alternative?
Ok, if our two choices are: Picnik or native solution, you (and
probably most of us) prefer native solution. If our two choices are
Picnik or nothing, I say, let's get to work.
And of course, when I say "let's", I mean me. :) With a bit of help.
Steve