Brion wrote:
>Theoretically, one might keep them as
>physically separate wikis/databases while
>_encyclopedia_ sections in all languages are
>consolidated into a single database that is
>aware of the connections between languages.
Yes, please lets have all the encyclopedia sections in
one wiki and keep this separate from non-encyclopedia
projects such as meta, sep11 etc. This is conceptually
clean and also allows for meta to be a place where
Wikipedians can go when, for whatever reason, the
encyclopedia wiki is down (being on a separate sever
would further help). Meta also works differently than
the encyclopedias do and will probably need to become
a hybrid PediaWiki/bbs (or something) in the future.
So in order to allow for the evolution of Meta it
really should be kept separate (the same is true, to
an extent, for the other non-encyclopedia projects).
>Or, all sections (the encyclopedia in each
>language, the multilingual meta-discussion,
>and the any-language memorial wiki) could go
>into a single glob, and we make a distinction
>between types of sections only for purposes of
>linking encyclopedia articles on the same topic
>together.
I don't like this option at all. It does makes perfect
sense to have all encyclopedia sections in one wiki
but tribute sections and Meta should be on their own
Wikis (one for all tribute sections and one for Meta -
ProjectSourceburg should probably also have its own
wiki too since this project really does need special
software features). In terms of either their goals or
software needs each project (encyclopedia, tribute,
meta and source) is a different animal and really
should have their own cages.
--Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Excellent!
What I have done so far is let Brion or LDC or Jason or someone handle
the handing out of developer accounts. The password needs to go via
some secure channel, telephone is good, or pgp.
I see no reason to restrict your access to just that account, though.
wiki pedista wrote:
> I routinely work on linux and unix machines, and I
> administer my linux box. I do not have much experience
> with php and apache, but I know enough not to break
> havoc.
>
> I wouldn't ask for it if there were a qualified
> developer in the spanish wiki, but I think I am the
> closest person there is.
>
> My intention for the time beeing is just to modify
> the LanguageEs.php file, so even an account with only
> write access to that directory would be enough.
>
> Ive
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Are the language codes always going to be two characters, or might there
be longer ones? Might we want to support distinctions like en_US and
en_UK one day?
Jonathan
--
Geek House Productions, Ltd.
Providing Unix & Internet Contracting and Consulting,
QA Testing, Technical Documentation, Systems Design & Implementation,
General Programming, E-commerce, Web & Mail Services since 1998
Phone: 604-435-1205
Email: djw(a)reactor-core.org
Webpage: http://reactor-core.org
Address: 2459 E 41st Ave, Vancouver, BC V5R2W2
How can someone sign up for SourceForge? Dante says he tried twice, but never got in -- and never got an explanation.
----
Do us all a favor, oh great public servant (sysop Tokerboy), and create a Wikipedia:Feature wishlist page. Then, volunteer to coordinate between the various mailing lists, source forge and that new page. You can hold votes and report results. What's stopping you? ;-) --Uncle Ed
Speaking of Source Forge, I've tried to sign up twice (so that I can put in a feature request) and it won't work. I didn't even get a response to my query as to why I couldn't sign up. -- Dante Alighieri 00:27 Dec 6, 2002 (UTC)
----
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
Main change is support for even more TeX.
= More TeX =
Of 6302 tests:
* 5497 (87.2%) passed
* in 5072 (92.3%) cases it was able to produce HTML
* in 425 (7.7%) cases it couldn't, and I doubt this could be significantly
improved.
* 2 (0.0%) failed due to lexer (and in both cases they should fail)
* 20 (0.3%) failed due to parser, in all cases due to abuse of ^s and _s.
Could be fixed, but it's not a priority.
* 783 (12.4%) failed due to 203 unknown \-codes
* 179 \-codes in 684 (10.8%) equations were illegal (couldn't be compiled
by LaTeX with ams* packages)
* 24 \-codes in 99 (1.5%) equations were legal
* So 121 (1.9%) failed due to reasons other than genuinely illegal \-codes
* So of 5618 equations not containing genuinely illegal \-codes, 5497
could be compiled by texvc, what makes up for 97.8%, close to
promised 99%.
= Performance =
6302 equations, 119 145 bytes total, are all parsed in:
real 0m0.191s
user 0m0.180s
sys 0m0.000s
real 0m0.190s
user 0m0.190s
sys 0m0.000s
real 0m0.196s
user 0m0.190s
sys 0m0.000s
on Athlon 1 GHz box.
These are results of texvc_test, real results will be slightly lower
due to overhead of starting texvc on every equation.
texvc will introduce no performance problems, and in fact can
be faster than "just run TeX" solution as it can find out which TeX
modules should be loaded.
= Open issues =
* transparent PNGs
* Unicode support
* checking which symbols need AMS to be loaded
Main changes:
== $e^\sin x$ means $e^{\sin} x$ not $e^{\sin x}$ now ==
I hope that will make everybody happy.
== More TeX ==
It passes 5241 (83%) of 6302 equations from PlanethMath corpus.
Most popular functions it fails on are:
10 \cD !
10 \ca !
10 \size !
10 \textbf !
11 \bx !
11 \ell OK
11 \x !
11 \xi OK
12 \ad !
12 \kfield !
13 \F !
14 \Bbb Warning: Obsolete command \Bbb; \mathbb should be used instead
14 \P OK
14 \cidl !
14 \lag !
15 \lra !
15 \vert OK
16 \O Warning: Command \O invalid in math mode
16 \fr !
16 \p !
17 \text OK
19 \mv !
22 \A !
22 \rm OK
62 \left OK
OK = function exists, texvc's fault
! = function doesn't exist in standard LaTeX, amsmath, amsfonts nor amssymb
What should I do about these !s ?
== It's almost ready ==
A few fixes here and there are of course necessary, but I'd like Wikipedia
admins and all other people to take a look at texvc now.
The only change is CGI interface (written in Ocaml) to texvc,
available from math/texvc_cgi
It can be used to see HTML output, real TeX and generated image.
It's very rough, not i18ned and it doesn't even try to make sure that
TeX looks well on output. But it's just a small auxiliary script,
not part of Wikipedia proper, so fixing those problems is not a priority.
Please, let's do it Axel's way. He contributes most of the math articles. Besides, I also want to be able to edit a math equation directly in my browser.
Ed Poor
-----Original Message-----
From: Axel Boldt [mailto:axelboldt@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 12:47 PM
To: wikitech-l(a)wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] TeX, version 4
--- Tomasz Wegrzanowski <taw(a)users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 07:02:34PM -0800, Axel Boldt wrote:
> > TeX is not just for math nerds.
> > There are several powerful macro packages for creating all sorts of
> > diagrams, flow charts and graphics. These would provide huge
> > benefits to lots of Wikipedians outside of math.
>
> You will still be able to compile them on your computer and upload,
> just like you can do it now.
Sure, but I don't want to, because it's not the wiki way: people who
intend to improve my work are then required to install the necessary
software and recreate the work from scratch. It's clearly much more
user friendly to allow direct editing of the work's description in the
browser.
My point was that you want to give up this advantage for the goal of
output format independence, and that I don't agree with these
priorities.
Axel
Main changes:
= More TeX supported =
Number of passed PlanetMath equations raised from 3553 (56%) to 4432 (70%)
of 6302 total.
Portability of equations from PlanetMath is horrible - authors of articles
just love to create just a few commands more, to make markup look more cute.
Two such definitions: \reals (== \mathbb{R}) and \cnums (== \mathbb{C}) were
so popular that I simply had to add support for them to texvc.
This should be a warning for us - math markup on Wikipedia would be as
horrible as that if we allowed any TeX. (With texvc extensions you can
at least get real TeX from it).
There is also some stuff that I'm not sure if we really want to support,
most notably sub and sup scripting nothing. ($_x$ and $^y$)
Having said that, some of the failures are still texvc's fault.
= AMS Fonts =
If any of special AMS features are used, like \mathbb, AMS (amsmath, amsfonts and
amssymb) is loaded. I'm not sure if there is any point in loading it by default,
it would certainly slow down rendering.
Similar mechanism could be used to support many modules and keep performance
reasonable at the same time.
I think I forgot to mention this except on the French list; earlier
today I added a rollback-last-edit function (for sysops). It's currently
accessible from the user contributions page; next to 'top' revisions,
there's a 'rollback' link which will resave that page with the most
recent revision by an author other than the most current.
It's basically just a shortcut for page->history->old revision->
edit->save, not a new functionality, but rather handy if you've got to
do more than a couple at a time.
(See changes to Article.php; slighter to Language.php, wiki.phtml,
SpecialContributions.php)
I've also put the current CVS revision of everything as of a few hours
ago onto all the languages, so we should be running consistent.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)