2008/1/31, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org:
From what I can tell, the current code will still show a link to the sighted version, even if current & sighted are fully identical. I consider this highly confusing behavior, and I don't really see that we can go live with this, even as an experiment.
You're right, I also stumbled upon that. Although I disagree with the very last point, for the open beta, the current version is completely OK.
If not: I would really like us to figure out a solution to this. I do believe the situation where a page is current and sighted (and where any included templates are unmodified from the sighted state, or have been edited by trusted users & auto-reviewed), will be quite common, because this is after all the situation we're trying to optimize towards. A UI that makes a fully reviewed version look unreviewed seems like a major problem to me.
The text still needs some tweaking anyhow. In the case that the current version is reviewed/sighted, the text tates for IPs: "This is the latest sighted revision, approved on 1 February 2008. The draft can be modified; 0 changes await review. (+/-)". This should be changed to "This is the current version. It is sighted/reviewed, approved on 1 February 2008.", since the confusing part are the 0 changes awaiting review and it is much shorter. I don't know about the icon-based case.
For users, the current text is "The latest sighted revision (list all) was approved on 1 February 2008. 0 changes need review. (+/-)", which should be changed to the same: "This is the current version. It is sighted/reviewed, approved on 1 February 2008." By the way, what is the reasoning for users and IP seeing different text?
Best,
Philipp