At Wikisource, we would be wanting to install tools in batches, and often dependent on the namespace, so we would be looking to gadgetise, or some other readily available means. Also as some works/projects upon which people undertake have repetitive editing, so we would be looking to enable people to easily configure for their works of interest, even to the point of being able to look to produce certain tools per work/project.
We see that being able to produce tools that are ideal for a work or a project enables us to make certain transcriptions more appetising to the casual editor.
Regards Andrew
On 26 Mar 2010 at 18:14, Roan Kattouw wrote:
2010/3/26 Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il:
Thanks.
Note, however, that if you add JS snippets, it may make it usable to me, but probably not quite usable to many people who don't want to learn to edit their vector.js. I've been editing Wikipedia for 5 years and i only created a personal JS file a few days ago.
It's not hard, given instructions, right? The instructions tell you the name of the page and exactly what to put into it, all you need to do is Ctrl+C, Edit, Ctrl+V, Save. I agree it's not the most intuitive thing in the world and gadgets are nicer (see below), but it's not rocket science either (as long as you don't have to write the JS yourself).
Making a GUI for adding buttons, at least through the "Gadgets" tab in the preferences, is essential.
It wouldn't be hard to implement the more popular buttons as Gadgets, we could do that I guess.
I often write documentation for templates and having to type <nowiki></nowiki> all the time in examples of template usage is rather harmful, especially in the RTL environment of he.wp.
I just heard we'll be adding a nowiki button in the stock toolbar, yay :)
Will it be enabled in Wikisource, too? It doesn't work so well with the Proofread Page extension, which i use all the time.
It will, yes. If you could file any bugs in the interaction between Vector and ProofreadPage in Bugzilla, that'd be great.
In general, it would be less scary to hear the announcement that the Beta will so soon replace the current interface after the fixes to the important bugs in the Beta are actually deployed (line breaks in pasted text, image insertion in pasted text, etc.).
The copypaste issues were the consequence of accidentally enabling the iframe editor for 36 hours. I disabled it again as soon as I figured out what was going wrong. I repeat: the iframe-based editor and the copypaste issues currently associated with it WILL NOT be part of the default rollout. Also, I trust bugfixes made to the beta in the next few weeks will be deployed quickly rather than waiting for the switchover.
For example, it will be much better to share problems with the Beta on a dedicated page in en.wp or on Meta, than to report them through the rather inconvenient "beta feedback" page. (And maybe such a page exists and i am making a fool of myself :)
You mean http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prototype ? Also, software bugs can and should be reported at bugzilla.wikimedia.org .
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l