[Wikimedia-l] Let's have the courage to sit down and talk about VisualEditor

[rupert THURNER]

Am 30.07.2013 20:14 schrieb "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>:
>
> On 30 July 2013 17:03, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >If the overwhelming community sentiment
> > is that the cost of continuous improvement with a large scale user
> > base is larger than the benefit (as it was on dewiki), we'll switch
> > back (or to a compromise), and use a more rigid set of acceptance
> > criteria and a less rigid deadline for getting back into large scale
> > usage later in the year.
>
>
> de:wp convinced you. What would it take to convince you on en:wp? (I'm
> asking for a clear objective criterion here. If you can only offer a
> subjective one, please explain how de:wp convinced you when en:wp
> hasn't.)

Hi David, i am editing on dewp and enwp. I consider myself an experienced
editor, but not an expert. I did not participate voting in dewp, but i like
to try ve from time to time. Beeing a software developper I fully support
eriks arguments before. Imo pragmatic and flexible decisions help such
development a lot, just like Erik explained.

What i would have hoped though is that the wiki syntax gets changed where
it is difficult to implement. And what i would have expected are more ideas
to just edit parts of a page, like e.g. hotcat does it, to avoid such a
mammoth dealing with everything which feels slow then.

To give three examples:
1. why not define a metadata section for every page, where categories, and
access rights are stored? Then these parts already can be split out of the
"page ve".

2. Why not having a read and edit mode? Edit mode just adds "edit" links to
all applicable parts of a page.

3. Why not decide references can only be after paragraphs, and edited via
edit links showing up in Edit mode? so this part can be split out of "page
ve".

Rupert