On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:01:00 -0700, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 August 2012 16:52, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
As long as people in the templating community were at least consulted
with,
then that's fine. I'm just saying we cannot randomly throw features
onto
users without discussing it with them.
A good default assumption would be that we've done what we're supposed to be doing as software developers. User testing is a normal part of software development. It's kind of bad faith to assume we're not engaging end-users at all.
I hear what you're saying Ryan - although in fairness there is some history there, and also some very significant challenges on all sides to actually communicate. However, one has to keep in mind that sometimes the definition of "end user" can be pretty different. On reading this thread, I have the sense that lots of people commenting here see template creators/curators as the "end user" - but they aren't in any conventional sense. The end user is the person who actually uses the template.
Risker/Anne
How?
I don't see how the user who puts {{cite|...}} and never takes one look at the source for Template:Cite is the end user.
Template inclusion syntax is the same. No matter if cite uses ugly ParserFunctions, Lua, or makes a call out to a custom written extension the syntax used to include the template stays the exact same. I don't see how these users who never even look at template source should care what the template they use is powered by.