After the question came up a few times, Ryan Kaldari and I decided to document the official list of supported browsers and the information and logic that surrounds this topic.
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Supported_browsers
- Trevor
Why create yet another list?, we already have http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Compatibility#Browser ....
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:37 PM, K. Peachey p858snake@gmail.com wrote:
Why create yet another list?, we already have http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Compatibility#Browser ....
+1. We should keep that all on one page :)
-Chad
I guess no one knew about that page. When I searched for 'supported browsers', all I found was http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility#Compatibility_with_old_...
Oh well, if someone wants merge them, go for it.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/28/11 3:37 PM, K. Peachey wrote:
Why create yet another list?, we already have http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Compatibility#Browser ....
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Ryan Kaldari wrote:
I guess no one knew about that page. When I searched for 'supported browsers', all I found was http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility#Compatibility_with_old_... owsers
Oh well, if someone wants merge them, go for it.
For what it's worth: http://www.google.com/search?q=supported+browsers+site%3Awww.mediawiki.org
(Compatibility#Browser is the second result for me.)
Internal search could still use a lot of improvement. :-)
MZMcBride
Ha! That's awesome. Yeah our internal search isn't always up to snuff. Speaking of which, anyone know any good Java developers? Now that Rainman is gone(?), we need to find more people to help work on Lucene.
Kaldari
On 4/28/11 5:36 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
Ryan Kaldari wrote:
I guess no one knew about that page. When I searched for 'supported browsers', all I found was http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility#Compatibility_with_old_... owsers
Oh well, if someone wants merge them, go for it.
For what it's worth: http://www.google.com/search?q=supported+browsers+site%3Awww.mediawiki.org
(Compatibility#Browser is the second result for me.)
Internal search could still use a lot of improvement. :-)
MZMcBride
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 29 April 2011 04:13, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
Ha! That's awesome. Yeah our internal search isn't always up to snuff. Speaking of which, anyone know any good Java developers? Now that Rainman is gone(?), we need to find more people to help work on Lucene.
Just FYI that I've been studying Lucene and the Lucene-search extension because of my thesis.
-Niklas
Niklas Laxström niklas.laxstrom@gmail.com writes:
Just FYI that I've been studying Lucene and the Lucene-search extension because of my thesis.
Does this mean I can start working with you on the search infrastructure?
I did talk to rainman_sr and he let me know that he has much less time to devote to search, but I think he would be willing to help in some sort of hand-off if we have someone who can pick up what he has.
Mark.
On 30/04/11 19:45, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
I did talk to rainman_sr and he let me know that he has much less time to devote to search, but I think he would be willing to help in some sort of hand-off if we have someone who can pick up what he has.
Yep, that's pretty much right. I am still around (I was helping during the last week with setting up searchidx2), but I don't plan on developing any new features myself.
Cheers, Robert
Robert Stojnic wrote:
On 30/04/11 19:45, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
I did talk to rainman_sr and he let me know that he has much less time to devote to search, but I think he would be willing to help in some sort of hand-off if we have someone who can pick up what he has.
Yep, that's pretty much right. I am still around (I was helping during the last week with setting up searchidx2), but I don't plan on developing any new features myself.
Where's the best documentation for the search setup? And are there any pages with a roadmap for future development?
I'm particularly curious if the Java component can't be killed.
MZMcBride
On 30/04/11 21:38, MZMcBride wrote:
Where's the best documentation for the search setup? And are there any pages
If you by setup you mean the setup WMF is using then [1]. If you by setup you mean how we use Lucene (with some historical context) then [2] and [3] are a good starting point. Apart from that, it's reading the comments in the code.
with a roadmap for future development?
The roadmap is pretty much solving the bugs reported in bugzilla for the lucene-search extension. There is quite a few of them, but most of them are of technical nature.
Any further improvements in the *quality* of search results would require employing someone who specialises in natural language processing/data mining/search to improve on the existing algorithms. The algorithms we currently use are pretty much the-state-of-the-art in the opensource world, and I would consider any further improvement as proper scientific research.
I'm particularly curious if the Java component can't be killed.
I would doubt it. It isn't the case that we simply use Lucene out-of-the-box and that we could switch to another port. In fact, the backend search extension (lucene-search) is pretty big with some 50k lines of code. It implements a couple of algorithms I put together to work with the way how information is structured on Wikipedia, in languages I speak.
r.
[1] http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Search [2] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Rainman [3] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Rainman/search_internals
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Compatibility#CSS
MediaWiki is compatible with user agents which do not process CSS3 markup. Some additional features are available to browsers which can process these styles.
I.e., tough luck for browsers who can't. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26266 etc. etc.
JavaScript MediaWiki is accessible to user agents which do not process JavaScript. MediaWiki degrades gracefully and all essential functionality works without JavaScript, although some things might be less convenient.
Like no Site Notices. Oh, that's Wikipedia, not Mediawiki.
Text-only browsers MediaWiki is accessible to text-only user agents such as Lynx, and to interpreters such as JAWS. Some functionality is reduced.
...to the point that you can take your business elsewhere. < Like what? Dig through my closed invalid etc. bugs.
Why don't you add:
In general the attitude here at MediaWiki is you are crazy for not using what we here at MediaWiki expect a browser to be. Even if making our stuff work fully via pure HTML would allow for machine processing and more devices etc... who know what the future might offer.
jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Compatibility#CSS
MediaWiki is compatible with user agents which do not process CSS3 markup. Some additional features are available to browsers which can process these styles.
I.e., tough luck for browsers who can't. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26266 etc. etc.
JavaScript MediaWiki is accessible to user agents which do not process JavaScript. MediaWiki degrades gracefully and all essential functionality works without JavaScript, although some things might be less convenient.
Like no Site Notices. Oh, that's Wikipedia, not Mediawiki.
Text-only browsers MediaWiki is accessible to text-only user agents such as Lynx, and to interpreters such as JAWS. Some functionality is reduced.
...to the point that you can take your business elsewhere. < Like what? Dig through my closed invalid etc. bugs.
Why don't you add:
In general the attitude here at MediaWiki is you are crazy for not using what we here at MediaWiki expect a browser to be. Even if making our stuff work fully via pure HTML would allow for machine processing and more devices etc... who know what the future might offer.
You forgot to mention that the images should be converted to ascii art before sending to the browser, for greater compatibility.
$ w3m -dump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annette_Bening |egrep -i thethe|start|head -n 4 J. Steven White (m. 1984–1991) «start: (1984)–end+1: (1992)»" Warren Beatty (m. 1992–present) «start: (1992)»"Marriage: Warren 1988 TheThe Great Kate Craig Grifters, TheThe Myra for Best Supporting Actress
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM, jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
$ w3m -dump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annette_Bening |egrep -i thethe|start|head -n 4 J. Steven White (m. 1984–1991) «start: (1984)–end+1: (1992)»" Warren Beatty (m. 1992–present) «start: (1992)»"Marriage: Warren 1988 TheThe Great Kate Craig Grifters, TheThe Myra for Best Supporting Actress
What does this mean?
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
What does this mean?
i believe that might a comment regarding tables having a border defined in html or not.
"KP" == K Peachey p858snake@gmail.com writes:
KP> On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
What does this mean?
KP> i believe that might a comment regarding tables having a border KP> defined in html or not. Actually it was a test to see if any of you recognize text browser dumps or how terrible many peoples templates look in them. But as nobody does, never mind.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org