2015-08-11 15:21 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw <zdzislaw.wiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
2015-08-11 13:59 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON
<vigneron.nicolas at
gmail.com
:
You're mixing a little bit « validation » and « perfection ». For
example, if a page contains « word » or « wоrd » instead of « word
», it's not perfect but it's valid as it invisible for 90% of
readers and tools (plus, there is other tools to detect this specific
errors).
maybe...
but, there's another concern about the BGB (mentioned by Ankry), the
mental problem of new users - when they "validate" in edit mode or Visual
Editor and notice a typo (or absence of comma) it is just a click to
improve the text, but. .. in view mode, after noticing the error, you have
to do IT all (which is such a inconvenience causing BGB proposal): enter to
the edit mode, find again the same place in the text, place the cursor ...
I'm afraid of thinking like: "Uh ... it's just one comma, I click right
away in the BGB...
Z.
That a very good concern and I agree with you but how does the BGB will
change anything in this situation?
In fact, in this case, the problem is ni the edit mode, not in the BGB. And
the solution is not to forbidden tool or edition but to explain to the user
what to do and how to do it.
The BGB is not an idea of tool to improve correction but only to quicken
the validation when there is no correction to do
(and per se, validation is not an improvement at all ; the exact same text
could be red, yellow or green and could be perfect or very bad, don't mix
the metrics and the subject of the metrics).
Cdlt, ~nicolas