2008/1/31, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org>rg>:
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