On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
2009/9/25 Brian <Brian.Mingus(a)colorado.edu>du>:
However powerful it is, I'm not sure we can
really rule out future
incompatibility as you suggest by simply stating that we can easily
forwardport. This feature is intended to hack a fix on top of the
usability
issues inherent in templates. Every time we have
a discussion about the
pitfalls of wikitext the center of this discussion is templates. Even
without parser functions they are turing complete - with them it is a
complete usability disaster. So it seems that when we finally get around
to
developing a consensus about the changes we want
in wikitext, there will
be
widespread agreement that we need to change
templates. But so far,
without
any clear strategy on that front, we have no idea
what those changes will
be.
It's important to separate template *calls* from template
*implementation*: only the latter involves ParserFunctions and all
that other ugliness. Even if and when we do completely redo the way
templates are *written* on the inside, the way they're *called* from
the outside would probably not change significantly, nor would the
concepts of parameters and types. This means redoing template syntax
does not require any changes to the XML format.
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
It's certainly possible, particularly with something as generic as xml, to
create an extension to mediawiki that supports a variety of backends.
As I've suggested, however, without any clear vision of where we want
wikitext, and more generally, MediaWiki to go, then it is impossible to
evaluate the efficacy of this feature, especially considering that the
consequences of it haven't even been evaluated. Given the power of the
backend that this feature will be kludged on top of it will fundamentally
change MediaWiki is used. And yet, I just checked Strategy, there is no
vision for where MediaWiki should go moving into the future, let alone
wikitext. As far as I can tell this feature was cooked up in order to
improve usability, and yet when you improve usability by definition you make
the software easier to use and provide new affordances to your users. We
have no idea whether these affordances are in line with our general vision
for how users should interact with MediaWiki because we simply do not have
one. I have never seen a discussion about whether the ability to create new
interfaces via an interface is in line with either our lesser mission to
build an encyclopedia or our greater one to bring knowledge to every human
being. Lastly I would just point out that everything that can be done with
this new feature will be done, and I invoke the spirit of #qif to make my
point.