On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Dan Garry <dgarry(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 13 March 2015 at 11:23, rupert THURNER
<rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I d like to switch to an expert view where I see the real contents of an
article not just a mock up some machine generates from whatever source.
What exactly do you mean by "real contents of an article"? I'm not trying
to
be facetious, but there are a multitude of factors that can affect how an
article looks
lol, what i mean by the contents? compared to the look? the contents
is the text, not the formatting. i'd be not so keen in putting some
text into an article and you censor it away ;)
I am pretty
sure product management is able to design the options so that
they are easy to set and do not become messy :)
See my above reply on this. The complexity of a settings interface grows
exponentially with each setting added, as does the amount of support that
needs to go into maintaining the product. It's not a matter of "just making
it simple"; ultimate customisability comes at a cost.
that is true, and that
is fair enough. in the last 15 years i did not
ask for an additional setting, but i often thought to myself that the
existing ones would need some reorganisation or rework.
if you do not like a setting than you might consider leaving the text
as it is, and tackle the problem at source. one guideline is
sufficient to get the parenthesis or this lenghty translations to a
different position. it would fix the broken short-text in search
engine view with it. which is anyway better than code that takes part
of the information from wikidata, part it constructs itself, part is
from wikipedia, some is from commons. there is no edit button or you
would need 5 edit buttons and at the end everybody is confused where
to edit what.
and if i find this complex the answer is "use desktop version and look
on your mobile phone" *wonder*
best,
rupert