[Mediawiki-l] wikiwyg in mediawiki

[Tels]

Moin,

On Wednesday 26 April 2006 23:55, Joshua Yeidel wrote:
> On 4/26/06 9:26 AM, "Tels" <nospam-abuse at bloodgate.com> wrote:
> > Moin,
> >
> > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 10:55, Christiaan Briggs wrote:
> >> Wouldn't open in Safari (our standard office browser). Opened in
> >> Firefox and looks pretty interesting, but it's not WYSIWYG
> >
> > Er, why not? *confused*
>
> The term WYSIWYG is often used to describe user interfaces which give
> the appearance that the user is directly manipulating the final output.
>  Think Microsoft Word.
>
> Wikiwyg, on the other hand, is a live preview.  You still type
> wikitext, which is a code.  [I happen to think wikiwyg is very cool,
> even if it isn't WYSIWYG.]

Ah, sorry, I was confused. OTOH, I found the process of true WYSIWYG 
always quite confusing, since the editor usually has it's own ideas what 
it should format how. But lots of "normal" people are conditioned by 
word :-)

> >> or WYSIWYM.
> >
> > I will have to look that one up.
> >
> >From en.wkipedia.org/WYSIWYM:
>
> WYSIWYM (What You See Is What You Mean) is the paradigm created for
> LyX. It means that the things displayed on a computer screen should
> accurately display the information that is trying to be conveyed rather
> than the actual formatting.
>
> How that would be helpful in wiki-page authoring, where formatting is
> part of the meaning (unlike XML authoring, which is where WYSIWYM
> originates).

I am not sure if it is really possible to seperate meaning (list item 
number one) and formatting (this is a list item). The user usually has to 
specify both, anyway.

One could whip up a JS (think ajax) editor that behaves like word, but so 
far I think nobody did it. Probably because in Word, you select a 
headline, type the text in, then select lots of styling (bold/color/size 
etc), so having lots of fancy options is desired.

On a wiki you are more restricted, you only have to select headline and 
type the text in, the actualy look (size, bold etc) is not in your 
control. (well you could use <div style="..">, but that defies the wiki 
idea). 

Actually you try to only specify the content ("headline") and the 
structure ("this is a headline"), but no layout, formatting or style.

And I think since adding a headline is actually only 6 chars more than 
typing the text, most people found UI where you'd have to click "add a 
new headline here" more to bother than just to type it in. So thats 
probably the reason nobody bothered to make a WYSIWYG editor.

Did that make sense?

best wishes,

tels

-- 
 Signed on Wed Apr 26 23:58:30 2006 with key 0x93B84C15.
 Visit my photo gallery at http://bloodgate.com/photos/
 PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email.

 "I never forget a face, but in your case I'll be glad to make an
 exception." -- Groucho Marx

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 481 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/mediawiki-l/attachments/20060427/8b96e641/attachment.pgp