Been meaning to do this for ages... I've just checked in a replacement
for the old wiki page-based LogPage system which uses an actual table,
and Special:Log as a viewer.
Why do wiki-based log pages suck? Let me count the ways:
* Timestamps can't be shown in the user's local timezone and format.
* Links in the log can break assumptions (image use, wantedpages, etc)
* Broken or long markup in comments often breaks the logs beyond legibility
* They get *really long* really quick on big wikis like
en.wikipedia.org
* Archiving them manually is a pain in the butt and makes it hard to
look up past information
* The way it overwrites the current revision breaks history/contribs so
they don't behave like normal pages anyway.
* When someone changes the translation for the log name the log breaks
continuity.
Why does a log table rock?
* Like page history, only shows the most recent N items but can dig
arbitrarily far backwards
* Won't break when someone 'archives' or renames the page.
* Can limit the display to actions by a particular user
* Can limit the display to actions on a particular page
* Can limit the display to actions in a particular date range
* Can combine all logged actions in a single display, or keep them separate
* Links don't stink up the link tables!
* Comments don't get fouled up with unintended markup.
* Timestamps use user's timezone and format preference.
I had to modify the recentchanges table to allow signed namespaces in
order to include Special:Log updates in RC. Right now they list kind of
ugly, as eg 'Special:Log/delete' but RC could be hacked to display a
localized name as a special format (as we have a special format for page
moves). Be sure to run patch-logging.sql to update the tables.
There are probably still some rough spots: please try out all the
loggable things and make sure the result is more or less pleasant.
Messages probably need updating to look nicer or point at the new log
location.
-- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)