On 02/12/2012 09:42 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
I seem to be misunderstanding you, then, and for that I apologise :).
Why, thank you. :)
I think there is a risk of
breakage (I'm not a technical person, but doing pretty much *anything* creates some risk of breakage) but I disagree that we're not going to
Well, to put it less technically, you (WMF) have now on your hands one big text corpus in somewhat-natural language (meaning not-so-formalised), which is processed bottom-to-top only (for presentation).
You want to introduce an I/O tool which is complex UI component (an enterprise in itself), which will work with the corpus, but will do through an additional top-down path, at that. So, inevitably, more formalisation would have to exist on top level w/r to the bottom level. I didn't see the specifications, but this in its turn presupposes some "sanitisation" of bottom level each time un-sanitised page is hit with new I/O tool. You may shudder now. :)
I'm not including the rest of your post, as I still think I got your (WMF) objectives first time, actually. You want to boost participation, but you have to show (market) something technical, too. Which is prefectly understandable, with said caveats.
get the expected results.
Well, forecasts being forecasts, I'd guess that there'll actually form sort of constantly-renewed group of newbie-editors with /short/-lived participation. How big, anybody's guess. I'd truely like to see what reforms are planned on the ideological/organisational (social) side of the matters, though.
Yury