On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think it would be wise to add that for
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.
They could benefit from drafts, but in that case
better to do it on the
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
'You can't save, the site is read-only'->'Save-draft'->'The
read-only, the draft has been saved into your browser'.
This can be done in cutting-edge browsers using HTML5's localStorage
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