On 17/03/2008, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Since there is very little consensus over the "correct" ordering of metadata, any tool which reformats metadata in some rigid format is bound to step on some toes. Which is probably just an argument for *reaching* some consensus on metadata formatting, of course.
Yes, I've been using the tool for actual editing and that's already happened; somebody claimed that there was a 'right' way to order the interwiki language markups and rearranged it after I submitted.
The other problems I've had have been that one time the tool took an image on the end of a section I was editing and placed it in the interwiki language box. It kinda confused me because the image wasn't where I expected. ;-)
I also have been having issues with the references; this is one area where the editing tool shows great potential, but there's currently no way to edit a reference, without entirely deleting it and recreating it from scratch, which is a *huge* nuisance.
But other than that it looks promising. Oh and the 'header section and templates' section is much too big- it should be about 2-3 lines tall at most, they can always scroll if they need to.
Perhaps one solution to this is to make the GUI dynamic, reflecting the contents of the wikitext. That is, this:
Not sure, perhaps simply a smaller box in each case might be a simpler and more straightforward idea.
Steve