On Sep 18, 2007, at 10:17 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
How about two edit boxes: The first one containing article text, and location-specific material (including pointers to references, links, images etc), and the second one containing meta data (reference bodies, categories, GPS coordinates...)
I don't like this (but I may be in the minority). Wouldn't it be simpler to implement template expansion inside ref tags in Cite?
Templates are expanded inside ref tags... enwiki has dozens of {{cite}} templates.
Doh. I think I am confusing myself with a different issue regarding ref tags and templates. Perhaps it's the other way around?
So... the cite templates could be made even more granular to do templates for every reference (I'd put these in a different namespace). The "second edit window" would be invoked by clicking a link from the list of included templates.
I'm not sure two edit boxes is a good idea, but some kind of <meta> tag (probably need a different name to avoid confusing with the HTML meta tag) which can contain all the meta info would be good. Keep it in the main source code, but separate from the content. It would make it very easy to modify section editing to allow the meta info to be edited separately to the rest of the page.
Nothing inbetween <meta> tags would be displayed on the page, which could simplify things like having to prefix links to categories with a colon to get them to display. If the category link is in the <meta> section, it would add the page to the category, if its anywhere else, it just displays a link (although that would break backwards compatibility, so might not be worth it).
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
===================================== Jim Hu Associate Professor Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics 2128 TAMU Texas A&M Univ. College Station, TX 77843-2128 979-862-4054