Moin,
On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:49, Conrad Dunkerson wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
But Joe User still needs to plug information into the template.
Yes, the ability to type is still required. We haven't simplified things THAT much. :]
Or in the course of ordinary editing he runs into a template which is not suitable to his subject, but it's beyond his technical capacity to trace the problem.
In which case they ALSO wouldn't have been able to figure out the markup which the template has replaced/simplified. No, we can't anticipate everything that every user might want to do and have a nice simple pre-packaged way of making that happen all ready for them.... but that strikes me as an illogical reason for not setting up utility templates at all.
I'll never understand the 'it might be too complex so let's not do it' argument... setting aside that this just ISN'T complicated stuff, even if it WERE it doesn't TAKE AWAY anything. All the older methods of doing things are still there. Just now there are additional ways of getting things done - and if not everyone understands those, so what? It isn't hurting the people who don't. Indeed, it helps even those who don't understand the logic because all they need to know is the name of the template to call... not how it works.
You don't need to know how to build an automobile in order to drive one.
Software is not an automobile. That confusion is why we have so many broken and buggy programs, invalid webpages etc.
The 'we are building an encyclopedia not programming' argument is equally unmoving to me. Ok then... get rid of all HTML font settings, colors, tables, CSS, templates, et cetera. Oh, those are USEFUL for building an encyclopedia? Hmmm.... imagine that. I wonder if automatic distance conversions in articles would be useful... given that some of our readers (and editors) use imperial and some use metric? Temperature scales? Weights?
But do you really need to:
* invent yet-another-language, poorly * create yet-another-interpreter for it * create yet-another-lets-mix-data-and-code environemnt (think PHP, think javasript) for it?
I am not that against these functions. I just don't want horder of unexperienced people who think they can program because they know how to add two numbers up inject hundred or thousands little "programs" into the wikipedia. Wikipedia is a data collection. Do not turn it into a code repository.
Now I think I have said everything there is to say on that topic, about three times. So I shut up now. You have been warned :D
Best wishes,
Tels