Thanks everyone for comments!
I must tell that development of this idea will be regardless of proposal results, possibly with less functions however.
So feel free to post your suggestions on project discussion page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/MediawikiFS
This not only about MediawikiFS but more about your vision of Mediawiki IDE? How you think it should looks like? Which features should be implemented?
Especially, i am interested in feedback of people working close with Semantic Mediawiki extension and writing a lot of html inside wiki templates.
My other answers are inline:
23.09.2013 6:33, Tim Starling пишет:
We already have http://wikipediafs.sourceforge.net/ for that. Presumably if a lot of people wanted this feature, there would be more downloads from SourceForge:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/wikipediafs/files/stats/timeline?dates=2013-01-01+to+2013-09-23
-- Tim Starling
Its great that another idea realization exists! T:) ( by the way its hard to find it in google :D ). However, i found that WikipediaFS have no Mediawiki API utilization, and based on get/post. Unfortunately on my Ubuntu it not working properly, maybe i do something wrong, but can not examine it more than looking at sources. Another big point - it is only for linux.
23.09.2013 18:47, Gale Andrews пишет:>
Perhaps the fact there is no Windows support has something to do with the low number of downloads?
Sure, i think we can not ignore statistics: http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm I am sure there is both a lot of Windows and Linux users who maintain Mediawiki sites.
23.09.2013 20:20, Mark A. Hershberger пишет:
Editors and IDEs can be extended to use the API to edit files as well. I maintain the Emacs extension to do this (https://launchpad.net/mediawiki-el) and it works fairly well. ... The filesystem approach has some advantages, but it doesn't support versioning and everything else. The content of the article is only one piece of the picture.
I agree that editor support is good thing, but i believe file-system approach have more advantages than can be seen at first sight. Сoncretely, with versioning, why virtual fs can not support it? I think it can very well.
24.09.2013 20:06, Yury Katkov пишет:
I like MediaWiki IDE part in your proposal but I think that you have to rather concentrate on different features:
- Improving the existing syntax highlighting schemas for MediaWiki
markup. I saw that several editors have highlighting but it's incomplete
- Indentation. This is probably insolvable problem but without
indentation the templates look horrible
- Autocompletion
- Autocompletion of parser function parameters,
- Autocompletion of template parameters,
- Autocompletion of page names, template names, category names,
{{MAGIC WORDS}}, __OTHER MAGIC WORDS__ : there is a lot of stuff to autocomplete!
- Renaming and replacing. Presently I use MassEditRegex extension but
it's a minimum! It can't even undo its changes!
- Brace detection. Something to ease this nightmare with single and
double brackets, double braces and triple braces.
Yury Katkov, WikiVote
I agree that friendly markup editing and especially code-editing (SMW, html in templates) is very important for Mediawiki. This case should be try to solve via Mediawiki IDE idea, integrated with MediawikiFS.
24.09.2013 22:51, Nico Frieling пишет:
Hi Alexey, can see some potential in it, but am still not sure, what to think
about it.
Anyway, the late SMW+ had an extension called RichMedia ->
http://sourceforge.net/projects/halo-extension/files/SMWHalo%201.7.0/SMW%2B%
20Extension%20Suite/ which implemented - amongst other features -WebDAV access. Maybe it can serve as inspiration to you?
Kind regards Argi
Thank you, i got some inspiration from SMW+ code :D