Thanks for that, Gerard. In other terms I suppose my question would be this:
You've identified a problem (usability, particularly in languages with the
smallest or least technologically wealthy communities) and a partial
solution (usability extensions developed by UNICEF). Your post, though, had
the tone of hoping that readers would offer assistance of some sort - so
what assistance would you like? Was your post aimed primarily at the Board,
or is there something that other people could be doing as well?
Nathan
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Hoi,
The software has been tested but not all extensions are considered ready
for
WMF production. I am establishing contacts with, among others, people at
UNICEF to make sure that we identify the outstanding issues carefully and
fix them efficiently. Given that the CreatePage extension requires changes
to the skin, it may make sense to consider using a superset of monobook (I
do not know how feasible this is).
Given that the software is already being localised at Betawiki, we do not
need to restrict ourselves to English. I understand that UNICEF uses some
of
their software in Swahili :) I would love to consider Swahili for this ...
Kennisnet is interested in this functionality, that would make Dutch an
option. It needs to be clear that it is not only Wikipedia projects that
will benefit.
The benefits from a more useable interface have little to do with a
"simple"
approach. Newbies are not able to contribute. Our need for more
contributors
and content is most dire in our smallest projects. Personally I am not that
interested in using "simple" as a test environment. From my perspective, it
should be there for all the projects that want it. Obviously, when this
extension is localised first, it will be more effective.
When we are to test this in a Wikimedia Wiki, we need to get involvement
from Brion. It would help a lot when the WMF actively takes part in this
collaboration and make usability a priority.
Thanks,
GerardM