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