Mailing List Archive

2008/12/5 Brian <Brian.Mingus@colorado.edu>:
> Semantic Mediawiki and Semantic Forms are already high quality mediawiki
> extensions that go along way towards usability and quality issues. They are
> also free.

Hi Brian,

an "environmental scan" of available technologies is part of the
project plan. We're well-aware of SMW and SMF - in fact we used a
screenshot of SMF in the grant proposal to illustrate easier editing
of template data. We'll definitely examine it as a potential building
block, and we'll share our thinking throughout the project.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Thank you Erik!
But I do not believe the potential scope of these two extensions has been
appropriately realized by the powers that be, otherwise the technologies
would have been put to a large scale trial sooner. It is not just about the
facts contained in template data. With these extensions more advanced wiki
users can design information architectures that abstract away all of the
complicated syntax.

Isn't that what this is about? WYSIWYG can only do so much unless you plan
to re-implement the parser in javascript.


On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Erik Moeller <erik@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> 2008/12/5 Brian <Brian.Mingus@colorado.edu>:
> > Semantic Mediawiki and Semantic Forms are already high quality mediawiki
> > extensions that go along way towards usability and quality issues. They
> are
> > also free.
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> an "environmental scan" of available technologies is part of the
> project plan. We're well-aware of SMW and SMF - in fact we used a
> screenshot of SMF in the grant proposal to illustrate easier editing
> of template data. We'll definitely examine it as a potential building
> block, and we'll share our thinking throughout the project.
> --
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
(Not sent from my iPhone)
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/5 Brian <Brian.Mingus@colorado.edu>:
> Thank you Erik!
> But I do not believe the potential scope of these two extensions has been
> appropriately realized by the powers that be, otherwise the technologies
> would have been put to a large scale trial sooner.

Up until July 2008, the paid technology team of the Wikimedia
Foundation consisted of four people who were responsible for software
development, operations management, and office IT support. So, the
"powers that be" have been pretty busy. :-) I agree these extensions
are very powerful; it's wonderful that they were developed
independently, and there are quite a few successful use cases out
there already to learn from.

We'll have to figure out what their role can be within a specific
restricted grant to help first-time authors. If we can't make
significant progress on assessing the more advanced features offered
by SMW/SMF, we'll certainly target that as a future goal.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Brian wrote:
> Thank you Erik!
> But I do not believe the potential scope of these two extensions has been
> appropriately realized by the powers that be, otherwise the technologies
> would have been put to a large scale trial sooner. It is not just about the
> facts contained in template data. With these extensions more advanced wiki
> users can design information architectures that abstract away all of the
> complicated syntax.
>
> Isn't that what this is about? WYSIWYG can only do so much unless you plan
> to re-implement the parser in javascript.

The relevant parts of the parser can quite easily be ported to JavaScript.
That's well within the reach of a project on this scale and it will
certainly be considered.

Non-technical users seem to be put off by syntax of any kind, simple or
complex.

-- Tim Starling


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense to
prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those who do
not consider it a turn off.
Thanks,
GerardM

2008/12/7 Tim Starling <tstarling@wikimedia.org>

> Brian wrote:
> > Thank you Erik!
> > But I do not believe the potential scope of these two extensions has been
> > appropriately realized by the powers that be, otherwise the technologies
> > would have been put to a large scale trial sooner. It is not just about
> the
> > facts contained in template data. With these extensions more advanced
> wiki
> > users can design information architectures that abstract away all of the
> > complicated syntax.
> >
> > Isn't that what this is about? WYSIWYG can only do so much unless you
> plan
> > to re-implement the parser in javascript.
>
> The relevant parts of the parser can quite easily be ported to JavaScript.
> That's well within the reach of a project on this scale and it will
> certainly be considered.
>
> Non-technical users seem to be put off by syntax of any kind, simple or
> complex.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/7 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense to
> prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those who do
> not consider it a turn off.

Yeah, that's where WYSIWYG gets tricky - the complicated bits can only
really be done in code, so what do you do when someone using the
WYSISYG interface tries to edit a page which includes complicated
bits? I'm sure it can be done, but not easily.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi.
One thing you CAN do is divorce the text form the templates. When you do not
need to parse the templates, you can show the text in a WYSIWYG way. You can
then either show the template in final form or with an "anchor" that refers
to the source that can be seen elsewhere.
Thanks,
GerardM

2008/12/7 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>

> 2008/12/7 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
> > Hoi,
> > When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense
> to
> > prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those who
> do
> > not consider it a turn off.
>
> Yeah, that's where WYSIWYG gets tricky - the complicated bits can only
> really be done in code, so what do you do when someone using the
> WYSISYG interface tries to edit a page which includes complicated
> bits? I'm sure it can be done, but not easily.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/12/7 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
>> Hoi,
>> When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense to
>> prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those who do
>> not consider it a turn off.
>
> Yeah, that's where WYSIWYG gets tricky - the complicated bits can only
> really be done in code, so what do you do when someone using the
> WYSISYG interface tries to edit a page which includes complicated
> bits? I'm sure it can be done, but not easily.

Templates and complicated parts can easily be hidden. See
<http://robotech.wikia.com/index.php?title=Sandbox&action=edit> for
example to see what happens to the {{sandbox}} template. Wikia has
been working on WYSIWYG for a long time now, and I hope the code that
is available at
http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
useful to Wikimedia in improving usability.

Angela

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
Many organisations use MediaWiki, many organisations use all kinds of
extensions to make MediaWiki more usable. Extensions do not necessarily work
for stable releases. This is why extension testing is important for us all.
Extensions are used in many languages this is why internationalisation and
localisation is important to us all. The lack of usability affects all
current MediaWiki installations now, and it is for this reason that people
are looking for any and all improvements that make a difference.

I had a look at the Wikia work and I love it. It indeed makes a difference.
How can all this work be leveraged in a more inclusive way. Wikia has
invested in usability, so did UNICEF. Because of a lack of cooperation, of
sharing the benefits of Open Source do not materialise. With the Wikimedia
Foundation receiving much money, we will either find another separate
project or a more inclusive project.

By cooperating with the people who have been working on usability the return
on the investment can be improved. I urge everyone to cooperate because the
alternative is a big waste of effort and money. Too much money and effort
have already been wasted. I know that Wikia has been working on WYSIWYG but
given that they operate their own repository it is not clear if and how we
can cooperate.

This cooperation can extend to the testing of extensions, localisation and
internationalisation... You know, usability and cooperation is needed now.

Thanks,
GerardM


2008/12/9 Angela <beesley@gmail.com>

> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 2008/12/7 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
> >> Hoi,
> >> When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense
> to
> >> prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those
> who do
> >> not consider it a turn off.
> >
> > Yeah, that's where WYSIWYG gets tricky - the complicated bits can only
> > really be done in code, so what do you do when someone using the
> > WYSISYG interface tries to edit a page which includes complicated
> > bits? I'm sure it can be done, but not easily.
>
> Templates and complicated parts can easily be hidden. See
> <http://robotech.wikia.com/index.php?title=Sandbox&action=edit> for
> example to see what happens to the {{sandbox}} template. Wikia has
> been working on WYSIWYG for a long time now, and I hope the code that
> is available at
> http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
> useful to Wikimedia in improving usability.
>
> Angela
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

particularly i like the table editor. i'd be even tempted to edit on
wikia and later copy the table to wikipedia :)

rupert.


On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 10:07, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2008/12/7 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
>>> Hoi,
>>> When so many people are turned off by syntax of any kind, it makes sense to
>>> prevent them to see such syntax. It should be there however for those who do
>>> not consider it a turn off.
>>
>> Yeah, that's where WYSIWYG gets tricky - the complicated bits can only
>> really be done in code, so what do you do when someone using the
>> WYSISYG interface tries to edit a page which includes complicated
>> bits? I'm sure it can be done, but not easily.
>
> Templates and complicated parts can easily be hidden. See
> <http://robotech.wikia.com/index.php?title=Sandbox&action=edit> for
> example to see what happens to the {{sandbox}} template. Wikia has
> been working on WYSIWYG for a long time now, and I hope the code that
> is available at
> http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
> useful to Wikimedia in improving usability.
>
> Angela
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
> example to see what happens to the {{sandbox}} template. Wikia has
> been working on WYSIWYG for a long time now, and I hope the code that
> is available at
> http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
> useful to Wikimedia in improving usability.

Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
extension, where is the root of the extension?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
> Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
> which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
> extension, where is the root of the extension?

It's an extension plus some changes to the parser.

<http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg/extensions/wikia/Wysiwyg>

Angela

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
>> Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
>> which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
>> extension, where is the root of the extension?
>
> It's an extension plus some changes to the parser.

Do you (and Brion! and other MW developers) have the idea is it hard
to implement it into WMF projects?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
It is a question in the wrong order, the first question should be do you
think that the WMF projects will benefit from this. The second question
would be what does it take to make this happen. Wikia has had much more
incentive to concentrate on usability. It has many wikis that demonstrate
the effectiveness of their changes. Like the UNICEF extensions they are
based on a need and on observation.

When you ask will it be "easy", it is likely that you will find that it is
hard work and that several hard issues need to be resolved. The good news is
that this can be done together with Wikia and or UNICEF. *That* would make
the grant go that much further
Thanks,
GerardM

2008/12/11 Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>

> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
> >> Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
> >> which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
> >> extension, where is the root of the extension?
> >
> > It's an extension plus some changes to the parser.
>
> Do you (and Brion! and other MW developers) have the idea is it hard
> to implement it into WMF projects?
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is a question in the wrong order, the first question should be do you
> think that the WMF projects will benefit from this. The second question
> would be what does it take to make this happen. Wikia has had much more
> incentive to concentrate on usability. It has many wikis that demonstrate
> the effectiveness of their changes. Like the UNICEF extensions they are
> based on a need and on observation.
>
> When you ask will it be "easy", it is likely that you will find that it is
> hard work and that several hard issues need to be resolved. The good news is
> that this can be done together with Wikia and or UNICEF. *That* would make
> the grant go that much further

I would just like to know how hard is it to implement. Usually, all
significant technical issues related to WMF MW installations have
significant technical problems. This is especially true whenever we
are talking about MW Parser. But, if the second largest MW host
implemented it, it gives to me a hope that it is possible.

Knowing that it is based on FCKeditor, and knowing how it works
(including a possibility to switch to wiki markup), it would be really
great to see it on WMF sites (even I am not one of those who would
benefit from it because it is easier to me to type ''...'' instead of
CTRL+I...CTRL+I).

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
>>> Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
>>> which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
>>> extension, where is the root of the extension?
>>
>> It's an extension plus some changes to the parser.
>
> Do you (and Brion! and other MW developers) have the idea is it hard
> to implement it into WMF projects?

We're hoping to get parser changes into the core to make that easy.
(Sorry for being off-topic on this list - please contact me offlist
for any more questions on this).

Angela

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

the proper list would be mediawiki-l?

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 00:21, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/branches/wysiwyg will be
>>>> Is it a MediaWiki fork or just an extension? If it is a fork, up to
>>>> which extent it is compatible with the main MediaWiki? If it is an
>>>> extension, where is the root of the extension?
>>>
>>> It's an extension plus some changes to the parser.
>>
>> Do you (and Brion! and other MW developers) have the idea is it hard
>> to implement it into WMF projects?
>
> We're hoping to get parser changes into the core to make that easy.
> (Sorry for being off-topic on this list - please contact me offlist
> for any more questions on this).
>
> Angela
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l