--- Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote: > Muke Tever wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:07:02 +0100, Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
Really? Can you provide links? I only remember people emphasising that they don't mind because they think the current work-around work perfectly for them. I seriously don't see how anyone can seriously be opposed to having a dictionary with correct spellings. :/
I disagreed,
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wiktionary-l/2004-May/000018.html
Polyglot said it could be done but he would vote against it also:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wiktionary-l/2004-May/000020.html
I'm sorry, but I can't extract any arguments against this change from either of the two e-mails, only vague fears of something going wrong, and a description of why the current ugly workaround "works".
"ugly" is NPOV. Please explain what is ugly about it and what is not ugly about your proposed fix.
The only relevant thing I can see is your comment that "having separately-cased forms of words on different pages might overemphasize the difference between some senses of a word"; but this, too, is not an argument against the switch, only an argument against having two pages for Cynosure. Surely you can put that on one page ([[cynosure]] perhaps) and have the other be a redirect. This definitely does *not* apply to things like [[Kind]].
Now that would be a mess. If we had case sensitivity but no system of what went where. If we do opt for case sensitivity, we must not put uppercase definitions on lowercase pages sometimes when we feel like it.
Also, redirects are and should be far rarer on Wiktionary since there are often enough words in some language which belongs where the redirect would be.
But anyway ... this doesn't matter. I suppose we should have a vote, then. I'll set one up on meta:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_Wiktionary_case-sensitivity_vote
That page is NPOV, misleading, and ambiguous. Please try to fix it up. I've commented on the page.
By the way, how does search handle the existence of pages differing by capitalization? If someone searches for <greek> (v. [1]), which doesn't exist, are they sent to <Greek>, which does?
This is irrelevant here, because the same question already applies to multiple-word titles.
Currently, the built-in search is always turned off so we get Google's search heuristics by defacto... So I can't test this.
Are users who are used to case-insensitive search, or don't know the proper capitalization of the word, sent to <greek> when it is made, when they might have wanted <Greek> better?
Of course they are, but I sure hope that [[greek]] will contain a link to [[Greek]]. This is not an issue relating to the change I'm advocating here; this is a more general concern with the contents which is to be solved separately.
And what about for words which don't exist yet? Or exist in one case but not both? My feeling is the user should be directed to whichever exists if there is only one, given a choice if there is more than one, and given an opportunity to give the preferred case when making a new entry.
Will every word where capitalization is semantic have to be made into a disambiguation page?
Huh?
I would *much* prefer that pages, instead of being case-sensitive, be case-insensitive (even more than they are now, perhaps), with the page title in title case, and the regular capitalization indicated inline, as is now normally done.
I very much agree. I would go further and even suppress the page title, make it overrideable with a directive, or have it commented with "Page title: xxx" so it looks less like the headword itself.
Are you sure you're not just saying that because you're afraid of unforeseen consequences, or because you're simply used to the way it works now? I seriously don't think anyone would want to turn case-insensitivity on if we had started case-sensitively right from the start.
Umm... turn it on if it was already on?
Hippietrail.
Timwi
Wiktionary-l mailing list Wiktionary-l@Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com