Kirill Lokshin wrote:
On 9/18/06, Andrew Lih andrew.lih@gmail.com wrote:
It does not have to be mutualy exclusive. It's a hard problem, but they are not inherently at odds.
Of course they're not. But the answer will necessarily be more complex -- and much more flexible -- than merely "kill all the damn boxes"; we can't afford to cater *only* to those editors who can't deal with complex markup any more than we can afford to cater *only* to those who can.
Indeed not. But we should also remember, as the Perl folks are fond of pointing out, that there's more than one way to do it.
We could somehow make it easier to edit complicated templates and other elaborate structure. We could try to get rid of or strenuously minimize the too-complicated templates and other elaborate structure. We could foster an attitude that it's totally okay, with no inherent stigma or shame, to edit article text in ignorance of its structure (i.e. by blatting in raw, unstructured new text) with the knowledge that someone else will be along to fix up the structure soon enough. We could come up with more ways of linking experts who know the material with mentors who know how to navigate the editing system (some aspect of which, not matter what we do, is always going to be onerous for some would-be editors). Or of course we could do a combination of these things, or all of these things.