On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 10:09:48PM +0200, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
The argument does not fall on its face; it only
proves again that
MediaWiki is hard, arguably impossible for many, to use for languages
that are not left to right.
In other words: the argument *does* fall on its face, but we can
make a totally different argument: that it would be nice to support
Yes, it would be nice to support RTL better.
However that has nothing to do with banning a construct that has THE
EXACT SAME ISSUES AS THE TEMPLATES IT WOULD REPLACE.
The current functionality is not good enough. The argument that the
new stuff does not make the situation worse is wrong. People argued
that the new functionality will make it harder for many even in left
to right languages. It becomes therefore even more problematic to use
the constructs that are now considered in right to left languages.
The current stuff is broken, the fact that the proposed new stuff is
broken in the same way does not make it an excuse. Please remember
what our objective is: information for all people in their language.
You know what's weird?
I agree with Gerard, kinda.
If there's a structural problem with the API to a template
implementation of functionality, then the time when you reimplement
that API into the core is the time to fix it, if you can, if only to
avoid institutionalizing an API with a structure which can't be
extended in the necessary fashion.
I don't know that this is that case, but if that particular aspect of
the thing hasn't been examined, perhaps it should be...?
Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com
+1 727 647 1274
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?