The smaller set of improvements you propose will likely require a large amount of change to the MediaWiki code. Which is more sane? * Editing a large amount of code to make small changes. And then ending up finding out that further improvements can't be made without hacks and needing to edit a large amount of code again. * One group editing a large amount of code to make small changes, at the same time that another group decides to do something similar yet incompatible with the other than extends the functionality in another way. * Or one group editing a large amount of code to make small changes at the same time as opening up the ability to improve that further without the use of hacks.
I noted the Title hack because as it is, both the css and js versions are complete hacks, the DISPLAYTITLE function was created to try and stop people from using those hacks by giving functionality for it inside of MediaWiki itself. However as you see, people are still using the Title hack and haven't stopped using it despite the fact that DISPLAYTITLE exists, that shows that there is something left to be desired in the current implementation before people are going to stop using ugly hacks on common wiki.
~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of: -The Gaiapedia (http://gaia.wikia.com) -Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG) -and Wiki-Tools.com (http://wiki-tools.com)
Simetrical wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM, DanTMan dan_the_man@telus.net wrote:
Well, if you've checked any number of active wiki, you're likely to run into the {{Title}} hack. Last I checked wiki like Wookiepedia and Uncyclopedia which are only second to the Wikimedia wiki in size have been using it for ages.
What is that, a JavaScript hack? Looks to be. This won't interfere with it.
However, to reduce the complaints and negative comments. Perhaps we should actually build that extension along-side a proper title rewrite as a Proof of Point, that it can be done without making it an absolute hack like it is.
I want to improve a certain class of functionality in certain ways. You want to improve it even more. That's fine, but it's not what I'm focusing on right now. I'm not as interested in the further improvements you propose, and I don't see why you would think they should be a requirement for implementing the smaller set of improvements I suggested.
On a similar note, there's another feature which is used in some cases: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Ascii_Translit That idea of allowing extensions to change the normalization process would void out the use of that extension, and allow for that kind of functionality without making it a hack, or needing to use redirects or double pages.
That would be an immediate application for a custom normalization function, yes, in the setup I envision. Not that I think anyone will do it anytime soon.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l