[Wikimedia-l] Let's have the courage to sit down and talk about VisualEditor
Lodewijk
lodewijk at effeietsanders.org
Wed Jul 31 11:19:08 UTC 2013
Thanks Erik for the helpful attitude.
Out of curiosity (not sure if this was discussed in more detail before -
apologies for that), is it indeed true that Visual Editor is significantly
slower than the regular editor (it feels like that to me, but might be my
computer playing tricks on me), and is there any chance this will be
overcome soon? I'm asking because you state that you want VE to move
outside the small group of users - and making it faster might quite easily
make it more popular with the non-diehard-non-new users. Right now I often
simply use the regular editor for simple edits, because it is just quicker
(less clicks, but also faster loading).
Lodewijk
2013/7/31 rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner at gmail.com>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
More information about the Wikimedia-l
mailing list