Tim Starling-2 wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
"IMHO the extension's rather low-level and awkward. It works, but it's ugly, and as with too many of our fancy syntaxes and extensions it drops this big blob of incomprehensible _stuff_ directly into the text of the article using it, cluttering up the editor's view. What would be slicker would be if we can rig up a visual editor for the thingy; compare with adding notations to images on flickr.
Yes, the user interface sucks. I was aiming with this extension to implement image maps in a manner consistent with the rest of MediaWiki -- a robust implementation but limited in scope. It sucks as much as everything else we have.
Think of it as incremental development: we get the code up and running, prove that it can cope with every stupid thing that anybody is likely to throw at it, and a nice pretty interface can be added later.
So do you want it or don't you? I'm not writing a visual editor right now, so unless anyone else wants to step forward, it's this or nothing. Will the extension be a help or a hindrance when we get around to revolutionising MediaWiki's ease of use?
It's got my vote. Am I safe in thinking this might well be a good way to put the dreaded {{click}} template to rest?
HTH HAND