bawolff <bawolff+wn <at> gmail.com> writes:
The extensions that are included with
have no bearing on which
extensions are used on Wikipedia. We don't have a fixed process for
deciding which extensions should be included with the MediaWiki
tarball. So far we've basically included just the extensions that are
both super-popular and super-general. I'm not sure if GeoGerba would
be a good choice for the MediaWiki tarball, since its somewhat of a
specific use case, that a great many wikis do not have (But that's
just my opinion).
Thank you for clarifying. I will stop my efforts to get the
extension into the MediaWiki tarball.
For Wikipedia in general:
Getting an extension deployed on Wikipedia can be a challenging
process, a process that often is very frustrating. Usually it has to
pass a code review check, and a security check (among other things).
Even getting people to do those reviews can be challenging, (There's
only a small number of people who can do deployment reviews, they are
very busy people, and deployment reviews are generally the sort of
thing that takes a reviewer a long time to do. Especially in this
Ok, I'm a
In order to get it deployed on Wikipedia, it would probably help (This
is just a stage 1 list of things, there would be other things to do
after this. I didn't even look at any of the js code):
*The php code followed MediaWiki core coding conventions
Hope this is ok. If not, I
will ask the GeoGebra team for help.
don't have to follow MW coding conventions, but it would help if any
js specific only to the extension did).
The extension uses $out->addScript().
Are this MW coding conventions?
be included in the extension (Loading js hosted on other sites is not
allowed on Wikipedia in order to protect user privacy)
That is very hard. I have no
access to the GeoGebra JS, although it
is basically open source. This is in contradiction to the concepts
to get always
the newest version.
*Given that (Assuming I'm understanding correctly)
this is basically
for viewing a fixed file (As opposed to something that people edit in
their browser), it would probably be better to implement this as a
MediaHandler extension, as opposed to a tag extension.
I will RTFM about
I doubt that
embedding base64 encoded files directly into pages is going to be ok.
Use of base64
encoded files is only for legacy reasons.
You are able to embed a GeoGebra drawing from http://tube.geogebra.org/
by passing the file ID as a parameter. Example (German):
Syntax is simple and user friendly:
<ggb_applet width="964" height="478" version="4.2"
Ultimately, you'd also have to get Wikipedia editors to agree that the
extension would be useful (Getting Wikipedia editors to agree on
anything is harder than it looks)
I am used to hard work.