That's a very good idea.
A big green button "validate" at the end of the displayed wikitext content of the page may fit the need. It would open a confirmation popup with an explanation message the first k times the user click on it in order to make sure new contributors use it well (with k something like 3 or 5).
What do you think about it? I'll have some free time in a few weeks to implement a such thing directly into the ProofreadPage extension.
Thomas
Le 10 août 2015 à 14:31, Alex Brollo alex.brollo@gmail.com a écrit :
Ok; imagine that while opening a level 3 page, an ajax query uploads quietly the raw code of the page; as soon as you click the "Big Green Button" the script could edit the code and send it to the server - in milliseconds - and immediately could click the next page button.
If a review of page in view mode is all what is needed to validate it, there's no reason to enter in edit mode when there's nothing to fix.
Alex
2015-08-10 18:14 GMT+02:00 Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com: The Big Validate Button is a good idea, but I also would like a better navigation experience, as it is pretty slow and cumbersome to got on the top of the page to click a tiny arrow, wait for the new page, click edit, etc.
Aubrey
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Alex Brollo alex.brollo@gmail.com wrote: If this is true, then to add a big button "Validate" to edit by ajax the code of the page (the header section only needs to be changed if there's no error to fix into the txt) should be a banal task for a good programmer.
Perhaps Andrea is asking for much more, but this could be a first step.
Alex
2015-08-10 14:47 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com: 2015-08-10 15:37 GMT+02:00 Alex Brollo alex.brollo@gmail.com:
First point is: is it a safe practice to validate a page without reviewing its raw code?
Probably yes. Obviously, it's safer to check the raw code but it's unrealistic to expect the raw code to be review for all page. Anyway, the pages doesn't contain a lot of code (and most pages does'nt contain code at all), so it doesn't seems to be crucial to me. Plus : when VisualEditor will be on WS, less and less people will actually see the raw wikicode.
A second point: is it a safe practice to validate a page without carefully reviewing its transclusion into ns0?
Definitively yes. When can a transclusion can go wrong? In all cases I can think of, the problem come from templates, css classes or general stuff like that. It should be fixed generally and it shouldn't block the page validation since it have nothing to do the the page itself (but maybe I'm missing an obvious example here).
Alex
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l