On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it would be wise to add that for anonymous users. People could be seeing drafts from other people and we would be unable to assist or even verify reports of things that people see that their coworkers are writing.
So?
They could benefit from drafts, but in that case better to do it on the browser itself.
I don't see a practical difference between that and using cookies here (except, e.g., DB read-only).
IMHO we still need some kind of saving into firefox storage, for cases like a read-only db. Instead of 'You can't save, the site is read-only'->'Save-draft'->'No, you can't, the db is read-only', 'You can't save, the site is read-only'->'Save-draft'->'The site is read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'.
This can be done in cutting-edge browsers using HTML5's localStorage and sessionStorage.
A completely different approach could be to allow anyone to view other's drafts. As a new feature, it could be accepted as it is, without treating it as a completely privacy section. Normal wikipedians won't mind of people seeing the article as they're writing in. However, the auto-save-draft may conflict with it.
I'd be completely behind this, now that you mention it. It's like how we don't allow private discussions between users (except by e-mail, okay). We should be encouraging transparency at every step of using the software.