Hey,
Heads up that it is a possibility that Trevor's Drafts extension may be enabled after it is reviewed. I wanted to bring this to the attention of the design team just in case it hasn't been mentioned, because it currently adds a button to the editing interface. If anyone wants to have input on this, now is the time to speak up.
As I understand it, this is different than the drafts idea that has been discussed for article creation. Rather than a namespace where pages could be moved in and out, this is instead drafts at the more granular level of individual edits. Drafts are put in to a log, but are individually owned.
Docs:
* https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37992 * https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Drafts * https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/status:open+project:mediawiki/extensions/...
Can you give a greater explanation? Is this a standalone extension, is it part of the E3 team's work....?
On 15 September 2012 21:43, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hey,
Heads up that it is a possibility that Trevor's Drafts extension may be enabled after it is reviewed. I wanted to bring this to the attention of the design team just in case it hasn't been mentioned, because it currently adds a button to the editing interface. If anyone wants to have input on this, now is the time to speak up.
As I understand it, this is different than the drafts idea that has been discussed for article creation. Rather than a namespace where pages could be moved in and out, this is instead drafts at the more granular level of individual edits. Drafts are put in to a log, but are individually owned.
Docs:
- https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37992
- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Drafts
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/status:open+project:mediawiki/extensions/...
-- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
Can you give a greater explanation? Is this a standalone extension, is it part of the E3 team's work....?
No, it's not an E3 thing. Mz just filed a bug bringing up the fact that it was derelict and potentially useful.
Gotcha. I'm going to reply there, but to duplicate my comments for the sake of people not following the bugzilla thread:
TL;DR, I really oppose turning this on with the way it's formatted now and using the process that's being discussed.
*For more detail on each point; this is not, as MzMcBride claims, "just a change to core functionality". It introduces a completely new workflow, alters existing ones and sticks a big button on the (already overfilled) page that we know all editors are going to see. There is no way this can be turned on without a community discussion unless you want a raging storm of anger hurled in the direction of whoever hits the big red button. *The UI elements clash with current thinking about the direction that we're going in. The Micro Designs Improvement project is currently working on the edit window as we speak, and plans to do a couple more iterations given the opportunity. I'd rather not throw two competing philosophies of design into the mix - that works if they're from the same team, but I worry we'd end up with (at best) an inconsistent UI. *This really doesn't seem an efficient way to do things. What's the use case here, exactly? If it's "people would like to save a draft in case they lose their work", save the draft automatically after [number] of minutes or seconds rather than requiring them to actually make a decision, and then just void any drafts after [other number] of minutes or seconds. If it's "we want to sort how confusing the existing setup is by offering functions found on other sites", integrate that into the existing workflows to avoid button bloat. At https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Drafts I'm seeing edge cases discussed and the workflow discussed...but not how this in any way can be integrated into how Wikipedia currently works, or how we'd like it to work, or what exactly the use case is for this software. If there is a use case, it needs to be communicated. If there isn't, we shouldn't be turning it on.
On 15 September 2012 21:56, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Can you give a greater explanation? Is this a standalone extension, is it part of the E3 team's work....?
No, it's not an E3 thing. Mz just filed a bug bringing up the fact that it was derelict and potentially useful.
-- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/
Is this on WMF labs for testing purposes? From a brief read of the extension info page I see that a user would be able to save their drafts and access them - but thinking from a helping new users perspective, is there a way for other users (admins?) to access these drafts to help newbies who wonder where their drafts are when they navigate away from the page? This is going to need a lot of documentation, help page information etc as the idea of drafts is a new concept. New terminology may need to be introduced now - we currently 'save' a page, but you would 'publish' a draft.
To add to Oliver's comments below, what would the proposed workflow for editing be?
Edit page -> Save draft -> Publish draft Edit page -> Save page
What about when someone wants to 'unpublish' a draft? I imagine there could be instances when users would accidentally publish their drafts and then wouldn't want the old drafts to be publicly viewable.
Excuse me if all of these discussions have already happened, if they have I appear to have missed them!
Thehelpfulone Sent from my iPhone
On 15 Sep 2012, at 22:10, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
Gotcha. I'm going to reply there, but to duplicate my comments for the sake of people not following the bugzilla thread:
TL;DR, I really oppose turning this on with the way it's formatted now and using the process that's being discussed.
*For more detail on each point; this is not, as MzMcBride claims, "just a change to core functionality". It introduces a completely new workflow, alters existing ones and sticks a big button on the (already overfilled) page that we know all editors are going to see. There is no way this can be turned on without a community discussion unless you want a raging storm of anger hurled in the direction of whoever hits the big red button. *The UI elements clash with current thinking about the direction that we're going in. The Micro Designs Improvement project is currently working on the edit window as we speak, and plans to do a couple more iterations given the opportunity. I'd rather not throw two competing philosophies of design into the mix - that works if they're from the same team, but I worry we'd end up with (at best) an inconsistent UI. *This really doesn't seem an efficient way to do things. What's the use case here, exactly? If it's "people would like to save a draft in case they lose their work", save the draft automatically after [number] of minutes or seconds rather than requiring them to actually make a decision, and then just void any drafts after [other number] of minutes or seconds. If it's "we want to sort how confusing the existing setup is by offering functions found on other sites", integrate that into the existing workflows to avoid button bloat. At https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Drafts I'm seeing edge cases discussed and the workflow discussed...but not how this in any way can be integrated into how Wikipedia currently works, or how we'd like it to work, or what exactly the use case is for this software. If there is a use case, it needs to be communicated. If there isn't, we shouldn't be turning it on.
On 15 September 2012 21:56, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote: Can you give a greater explanation? Is this a standalone extension, is it part of the E3 team's work....?
No, it's not an E3 thing. Mz just filed a bug bringing up the fact that it was derelict and potentially useful.
-- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/
-- Oliver Keyes Community Liaison, Product Development Wikimedia Foundation
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
It appears to be on http://kubo.wmflabs.org/wiki/Main_Page at the moment, and those proposed workflows don't...really meet what the software seems to do :S. This is based on the deployment at http://kubo.wmflabs.org/wiki/Main_Page
Like, if I save a draft, cool. Except it doesn't reappear when I open the same page's editing window again. Okay, so I check my contributions....it's not listed there either. From my perspective as someone familiar with wikipedia, "save draft" never happened. It's asking people to either learn an entirely new process regardless of their existing mediawiki experience or dismiss the feature entirely. Is the deployment at Kubo not representative? If not, what, exactly, is the workflow?
On 15 September 2012 22:26, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonewiki@gmail.comwrote:
Is this on WMF labs for testing purposes? From a brief read of the extension info page I see that a user would be able to save their drafts and access them - but thinking from a helping new users perspective, is there a way for other users (admins?) to access these drafts to help newbies who wonder where their drafts are when they navigate away from the page? This is going to need a lot of documentation, help page information etc as the idea of drafts is a new concept. New terminology may need to be introduced now - we currently 'save' a page, but you would 'publish' a draft.
To add to Oliver's comments below, what would the proposed workflow for editing be?
Edit page -> Save draft -> Publish draft Edit page -> Save page
What about when someone wants to 'unpublish' a draft? I imagine there could be instances when users would accidentally publish their drafts and then wouldn't want the old drafts to be publicly viewable.
Excuse me if all of these discussions have already happened, if they have I appear to have missed them!
Thehelpfulone Sent from my iPhone
On 15 Sep 2012, at 22:10, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
Gotcha. I'm going to reply there, but to duplicate my comments for the sake of people not following the bugzilla thread:
TL;DR, I really oppose turning this on with the way it's formatted now and using the process that's being discussed.
*For more detail on each point; this is not, as MzMcBride claims, "just a change to core functionality". It introduces a completely new workflow, alters existing ones and sticks a big button on the (already overfilled) page that we know all editors are going to see. There is no way this can be turned on without a community discussion unless you want a raging storm of anger hurled in the direction of whoever hits the big red button. *The UI elements clash with current thinking about the direction that we're going in. The Micro Designs Improvement project is currently working on the edit window as we speak, and plans to do a couple more iterations given the opportunity. I'd rather not throw two competing philosophies of design into the mix - that works if they're from the same team, but I worry we'd end up with (at best) an inconsistent UI. *This really doesn't seem an efficient way to do things. What's the use case here, exactly? If it's "people would like to save a draft in case they lose their work", save the draft automatically after [number] of minutes or seconds rather than requiring them to actually make a decision, and then just void any drafts after [other number] of minutes or seconds. If it's "we want to sort how confusing the existing setup is by offering functions found on other sites", integrate that into the existing workflows to avoid button bloat. At https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Drafts I'm seeing edge cases discussed and the workflow discussed...but not how this in any way can be integrated into how Wikipedia currently works, or how we'd like it to work, or what exactly the use case is for this software. If there is a use case, it needs to be communicated. If there isn't, we shouldn't be turning it on.
On 15 September 2012 21:56, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Can you give a greater explanation? Is this a standalone extension, is it part of the E3 team's work....?
No, it's not an E3 thing. Mz just filed a bug bringing up the fact that it was derelict and potentially useful.
-- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/
-- Oliver Keyes Community Liaison, Product Development Wikimedia Foundation
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
I might be just a conservative "old" user, but I don't see how the extension would change the workflow at all, see bug. Configuration can be adjusted to make this clearer.
Nemo
Thanks for bringing this up, Steven and Oliver. I'm sorry for having pushed Drafts into more prominence without checking with this team first. What's the best way to check with the design team to get a proper design review of a proposed extension, such as Drafts? Should I add it to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/UX_review_queue and/or ask the code author to follow https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Project_Design_Review_Process ?
Boring how-this-happened details: Just before my vacation this summer, I asked for some help maintaining the review queue (for new extensions to potentially be deployed on WMF sites: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Review_queue ). The Drafts extension got added to this list, and in late August I accidentally went straight into requesting code review and improvements from Trevor, using his 20% time. Per our procedures at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Writing_an_extension_for_deployment#Design_re... , I should have instead gotten Drafts a design review first, from WMF's product management or design team. That procedure document indicates that requesting a design review should start a conversation about the design of the feature, which should include community consensus on the wiki where the extension would be deployed.
Thanks.
On Sep 16, 2012, at 7:52 PM, Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks for bringing this up, Steven and Oliver. I'm sorry for having pushed Drafts into more prominence without checking with this team first. What's the best way to check with the design team to get a proper design review of a proposed extension, such as Drafts? Should I add it to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/UX_review_queue and/or ask the code author to follow https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Project_Design_Review_Process ?
Exactly this.
--- Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
I just want to clarify a few things.
1. Drafts is an extension from 2008 that never got deployed for a variety of reasons. I spent a very short period of time on it and it never has been user tested or reached a level of maturity to even warrant testing yet.
2. Drafts is being used by 3rd party sites including WikiHow, Jack et al may have some useful input on how it's being used over there
3. As part of my 20% time, I was asked to take a look at getting drafts out of "it explodes your wiki when you enable it" mode – which I have done[1] – and take a look at making it better which I am planning on doing but haven't really made any designs or decisions on yet.
4. If we are interested in using this feature on our sites, of course we should update it to integrate well with any design changes that are going into the edit page. It was an assumption that it may get enabled, and design changes to Drafts have not yet been proposed.
- Trevor
[1] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/21833/1
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.orgwrote:
On Sep 16, 2012, at 7:52 PM, Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks for bringing this up, Steven and Oliver. I'm sorry for having pushed Drafts into more prominence without checking with this team first. What's the best way to check with the design team to get a proper design review of a proposed extension, such as Drafts? Should I add it to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/UX_review_queue and/or ask the code author to follow https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Project_Design_Review_Process ?
Exactly this.
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Trevor Parscal tparscal@wikimedia.org wrote:
- As part of my 20% time, I was asked to take a look at getting drafts out
of "it explodes your wiki when you enable it" mode – which I have done[1] – and take a look at making it better which I am planning on doing but haven't really made any designs or decisions on yet.
Thanks. Could you get that fix merged?
I've also installed it on mwreview.wmflabs.org with your patch applied. I agree that it still needs various fixes before it's deployable, and this likely exceeds what's doable in 20% time. So unless volunteer devs want to take it up I don't think we can get this out the door quickly.
I've looked through some of the old Calcey reports and added a few must-fix dependencies to https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37992 . Notably there's still one JS error (when dealing drafts for newly created pages) which perhaps you can fix as part of the "get it into a basically usable state" project.
Erik