On 12-02-06 10:15 AM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
I am forwarding below a response from Oliver Keyes, who isn't on this list.
Hey guys Sumana asked me to chip in; most of the arguments that can be made have already been typed up by people like Trevor, but I thought I'd go into a bit more detail and provide some links for those of you who want to do slightly deeper reading.
I'm not commenting on the pros or cons of redoing the underlying wikimarkup; that's a technical issue, and I'm not a technical person. What I *am* is a community engagement person - and Pavel's line that intelligent people can parse markup languages is pretty well within my bailiwick .
The problem with this line is that it has the potential to turn into a "true scotsman" argument. Pavel, you're clearly both an intelligent and a technical man - but not all intelligence is of the same, technically-minded type, and it's not always backed up by pertinent and complex knowledge. I'm sure that you, were you a new editor, would be able to quickly parse our syntax inside your head. However, you're someone who is technically proficient and knows a lot of the background to markup languages, and most people - indeed, most *intelligent* people
- simply aren't.
It wasn't always the case. Early and mid-term adopters of the internet (I count myself as the latter, having first got online circa 1999) were technically proficient, could probably code, and would certainly be able to deal with not only our markup languages but markup languages generally. This isn't necessarily because they were more intelligent than anyone else, though; this is because the structure of the internet at that time penalised anyone who *wasn't* technical; websites and communications methods expected a degree of technical proficiency.
Today that isn't the case. Site after site after site have realised that instituting technical barriers to participation artificially limits your audience and volunteers, and have introduced WYSIWYG editors in some way, shape or form. The result is that the generation of intelligent people we're dealing with now is not the generation of early and mid-level adopters we all know, love and are members of; it's the Facebook generation: people who have come to expect that the barriers to participating will be low, easy to comprehend, and simple to bypass. And because they've come to expect this, and the internet has indulged this, they don't necessarily have the technical knowledge or background to parse markup languages in the same way that members of this list might.
Of course, it's a mistake to think that just because someone is young they won't be technical - we have a lot of great, technically minded volunteers. Similarly, it's a mistake to think that just because someone is older they will be. For some cases-in-point, I recommend the usability studies the Foundation ran a couple of years ago - there are some great examples at http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usability,_Experience,_and_Evaluation_St... http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usability_and_Experience_Study#Wiki_Synt...
The simple fact of the matter is this: editing is complex and technical and we are not, as experienced people, necessarily qualified to say what the general population can or cannot do, because *we are not the general population*. The people qualified to tell us what gen pop feels comfortable doing and what gen pop expects of websites are, well, gen pop. And they've spoken, through the usability initiative and just about every conversation I've had with a reader, and, I'm sure, a heck-load of conversations other contractors and staffers have had too. The complexity of our existing markup language is a barrier, but not as much as the presence of any markup language whatsoever as a default.
I appreciate this is a bit TL:DR, and as I'm not really subscribed to this list I'm unlikely to see responses unless Sumana is kind enough to act as my gopher . If you want to chat more about the philosophical and cultural underpinnings of usability rather than the technical, I'm always up for a natter; okeyes@wikimedia.org
Oliver Keyes: I do not believe anyone is disputing your general arguments, above.
The concern I see being expressed, fundamentally, is "I have developed skills, practices, and efficiencies with current Wiki syntax. Is your new parser going to destroy my investments in learning? am I going to have to start over with this new system?"
As I understand it, for the foreseeable future there will be a raw wiki syntax interface available. I hope contributors can be reassured on this point.
Amgine