Hi!
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first.
-- daniel
It seems like people have some pretty good reasons for parsing JS/CSS pages (categorization, backlinks, speedy deletion templates, etc.), so unless there is some significant disadvantage to MW for enabling parsing, I'm going to have to agree with the bug filer. *--* *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo@gmail.com
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.dewrote:
Hi!
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first.
-- daniel
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de wrote:
Hi!
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first.
-- daniel
Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug.
We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed.
-- Krinkle
Yes, it should be put back. Unless maybe if there was a way to get out to wikitext from js.
2012/10/18 Platonides Platonides@gmail.com:
Yes, it should be put back. Unless maybe if there was a way to get out to wikitext from js.
Perhaps it would make sense to only parse comments? it might slightly degrade performance, though, and would also require a small level of adaptation from users.
Strainu
Krinkle wrote:
On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de wrote:
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first.
Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug.
We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed.
Well, the current approach is hackish. The links are kind of stored, but not rendered, so you still end up with dead-end pages and a completely surprising result to most users.
I think the last thing we need is yet another parser. There is already distinct parsing for weird parts of the MediaWiki UI (such as edit summaries and log comments). I think any further specialized parsers should be shot on-sight.
More thoughts here: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/39609 ("Limit scope of title-based syntax highlighting").
MZMcBride
In my opinion, parsing .js and .css as wikitext is a borken idea. Add some kind of pragmas to the page and strip them off in the ResourceLoader. John
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:44 AM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Krinkle wrote:
On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de wrote:
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
I'm inclined to (at least optionally) enable the parsing of script pages, but I'd like to get some feedback first.
Yeah, as more elaborately put on the bug[1], it was disabled in ContentHandler without dedicated discussion because it was thought of as a minor oddity that should be removed as a bug.
We know now that (though it might have been a bug originally) it is a major feature that unless replaced, must not be removed.
Well, the current approach is hackish. The links are kind of stored, but not rendered, so you still end up with dead-end pages and a completely surprising result to most users.
I think the last thing we need is yet another parser. There is already distinct parsing for weird parts of the MediaWiki UI (such as edit summaries and log comments). I think any further specialized parsers should be shot on-sight.
More thoughts here: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/39609 ("Limit scope of title-based syntax highlighting").
MZMcBride
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:43:32PM +0200, John Erling Blad wrote:
In my opinion, parsing .js and .css as wikitext is a borken idea. Add some kind of pragmas to the page and strip them off in the ResourceLoader.
Going further in that direction, I seem to recall one of the goals of ContentHandler is to allow for custom edit forms depending on the content type of the page. Which means that a JS or CSS page could have a wikitext header that is parsed and a JS/CSS area that is not.
But that would still break the "backlinks are used to find users who are using a certain script" noted at bug 41155, and depending on how transclusion works with that it could re-enable the circumvention of the spam blacklist mentioned somewhere in there. And it might screw up some bots/userscripts/etc that take advantage of the "can only be edited by this user & admins" protection given to user .js and .css pages to store arbitrary data.
On 18/10/12 20:04, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Hi!
When designing the ContentHandler, I asked around about whether JS and CSS pages should be parsed as wikitext, so categories etc would work. The gist of the responses I got was "naw, lets get rid of that". So I did (though PST is still applied - Tim asked for that at the Berlin Hackathon).
Sure enough, people are complaining now, see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41155. Also note that an older request for disablingt parsing of script pages was closed as WONTFIX: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32858.
Yes, categories on JS/CSS pages should continue to work, per my comments on bug 32858 where this was discussed in detail.
-- Tim Starling
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org