Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
Magnus Manske wrote:
Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
i all,
I made a proposal for a validation system at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Aoineko/Validation.
Any comment are welcome!
I have already implemented most of this as an extension. Exceptions:
* Only one version can be stable/validated at any time.
Why? To save space into the DB?
No. I just didn't see the point of having multiple stable versions. One
will do just fine.
Also, the "stable version" concept will be confusing to newcomers.
Suppose you get the stable version by default, and decide to edit it.
You'll be served the source text of the current version. WTF?
*Several* stable versions will be even more confusing, with little benefit.
* History highlighting is not yet implemented.
Why is this not in use?
* Pages with templates are not stable. One has to cache the template
versions at the moment they are declared stable/valid.
* Tim is working on his own implementation.
Magnus
What is the opinion of the community about the validation feature? The
French community heard from news-paper Jimbo wants this kind of
feature in the future but we wondering if there is already any roadmap
or some kind of official plan. Am I right if I say the article
*reviewing* (public grade) is an interred concept?
There's the Review feature, which replaces the current Validation
feature (which is already in the code, but inactive). See my other mail
on this list for that.
Let's call the one we're talking about "stable version", shall we?
In what way the Tim's implementation differ from yours?
The major difference I can see is that there's no working demo of it
right now :-)
Magnus