Not if the
people writing to error messages keep in mind who they are
for. "ERROR 574B: ''' not expected" will send most users running
for
the hills, sure, but "Please put ''' where you want the bold text to
finish" should just help people learn.
Imagine if you find this error while editing a long article (say any
en.wp country article).
Is the error going to be smart enough to locate where the wrong
symbols are? The edit box doesn't have line numbers.
It can theoretically be done. Here's an example for the "Bold one / bold
two" test:
http://can-we-link-it.nickj.org/suggest-links/suggester.php?page=User:Nickj…
(i.e. it prints the start of the line with the problem - but it's still hard to find
things in a long article)
For this malformed input:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nickj/sandbox&action=edit
... but whether something like this should be done or not, and if so how to present
it to the user, is debatable.
BTW ''' is valid. ;)
Personally I would include being balanced in the definition of valid, which this
example isn't - but it (and all input) is basically valid at the moment, since the
parser
never complains about anything (well, <math> extension tags can and do complain and
generate red errors on bad input, but they're an extension and an exception, which
does
not affect most people).
I have to agree with David on this issue.
David's point is a good one. We already have technical and social barriers-to-entry,
with guidelines, rules, processes, a particular style of doing things (etiquette, social
norms, etc), combined with some knowledge of wikitext required to do things. The last
thing
we want is to make it even harder on new users. So any warnings about malformed input
either
have to be opt-in, or there needs to be no errors. Either seems fine to me, just don't
foist
technical warnings or scary-looking red messages onto people who don't want them, or
know
how to resolve them.
-- All the best,
Nick.