As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly enthusiastic. I would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle new software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality, but working smoothly first. That said, problems are to be expected, and a new Wikitext parser-and-back, plus new interface, were bound to produce some broken edits.
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:46 PM David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 January 2016 at 20:33, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
- New things are not necessarily good just because they are new. What
seems
to be an improvement, especially for a technical mind, can be a huge step backwards for the "general population". On the other hand, projects like the Visual Editor can make work easier for many people, but few of them will realize what a daunting undertaking such a project is. The
complexity
As a huge VE advocate, I was quite disconcerted how hard the WMF was trying to force through what was clearly an early beta in need of real-world testing as if it were a production-ready product; I think this was the problem and the reason for the backlash. VE *now* has had a couple of years' development in a real-world environment and is really quite excellent (and the only sensible way to edit tables). But the problem here was not fear of change or fear of technology, but rejecting technology that was being forced on editors when it was really obviously not up to the job as yet.
- d.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe