On 06/03/2013 12:10 AM, Alex Brollo wrote: Excellent! However, on the transcluded page, the link goes only to the chapter URL. It should also add #pag137 or #pagename147, since all page links in the margin of the transcluded chapter are marked like this:... id="pag137"><span id="pagename147">... -- Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se) Project Runeberg - free Nordic literature - http://runeberg.org/ ______________________________**_________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.**org &lt;Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt; https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l<https://list…

Done Lars; I edited Modulo:Pg to keep Template:Pg simpler. Alex 2013/6/3 Alex Brollo &lt;alex.brollo(a)gmail.com&gt;

Automatic creation of page transclusion is nice but also dangerous... too many structures to have an easy solution.

I have been wondering the same thing for years. When I upload prints to Wikimedia Commons, I am generally in a hurry and just use the default uploader to get it out there. Weeks or months or sometimes years later I will add in the detailed metadata like the book it was first published in, alternate sources for the print from the one I used, the publisher if that is a different person than the artist, etc. What I don't bother with is page numbers, because this is often unknown and changes from edition to edition. You can get around this problem by naming specific editions held in specific libraries with specific page numbers, which I have done occasionally. Some prints are so well known they go by their own titles, and the Wikimedia Commons artwork template even has a field "Original title" to deal with this issue. When you go through an index of plates in any older book, generally there are some mistakes, such as blank pages that are indexed because the plate didn't make it to the printer, some plates the printer added that didn't make it into the index, and of course the really confusing one, the prints that a reprinter added that neither the original author nor the original publisher ever saw. One reason I have not spent much time on Wikisource is because I feel I have to decide up front what the structure of the book will be with page numbering (which sometimes does not count the plates), so I need to base this on the original index or original list of chapters. Sometimes a book becomes famous just for one passage, and that passage may not even be indexed in the original version. How do you add these links? On Wikimedia Commons you can keep on adding values to fields, and change the "Information" template to "Artwork" to get more fields. You can even add annotations to files and then put links to other files in the annotations, so that through the "Global usage" property you can see where such prints have been "quoted" or re-used. How do you do this with books? I would like to see a flexible way to set this up that makes it easy to come back and make corrections or additions to the published information in both indexes and ToC's based on later discovery. This book of prints for example shows a page order based on one edition that was reproduced in facsimile version, but other versions exist with different plates: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:32_afbeeldinge_der_Graven_van_HO… How do you set up page numbers for this, because there weren't any to start with? Jane 2013/6/7, Andrea Zanni &lt;zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: too you suggest transclusion if as _______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

many structures to have an easy solution.

..... I wonder if there is a better way to define the logic structure of our book, maybe directly in the Index page. I don't know what would be easier for the user: * define the table of content once for all in the Index page * define the table of content once in the book Toc (there is often one, if not always, when needed) * define the table of content just putting templates thorough the book, as the reader goes through the book. What do you all think? Aubrey

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, billinghurst &lt;billinghurst(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > I don't agree that it should be fully automated by any stretch of the > imagination. I can see that it is an option that some may wish to use, > but > I dislike the limitations, and do not see it working as the only means

Well, I think that the bot/Lua/extension/whatever could show to the user

window with the structure of the book as it would be created. The user could change some things, or Cancel the automatic transclusion. I don't know: to me, avoiding the burden of taking care of different namesapces, with diffirent templates needed and strange tags (eg

should be an aim for us, if we want the layman to understand Wikisource

contribute. I myself can't upload and create a whole book from the scan to the ns0 transclusion without mistakes or forgetting important things. Wikisource *is* difficult, Too much, IMHO. Aubrey