Hi
I seriously was thinking whether better to desubscribe from this list, because
until now, no helpful comment came. But, Yes, one (or more?) people wrote,
"great idea I like it", (and even looked up what might be done), but as soon as
MZBridge gave "helpful" :-> (not my judgement!) comments, this topic was
down.
Thus I would judge his remark was effectively the opposite of a help what he
triggered -- besides I asked for apples, he ignored this totaly but told me I
should wait to use later tomatos. :(
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:36:57AM +0000, Marcin Cieslak wrote:
Achim Flammenkamp <achim(a)uni-bielefeld.de>
wrote:
My aim is the have on wikimedia/wikipedia (/wiki-whatever sounds apropriate)
1) a version-control environment (as we have for artcile-, talk-, user-,
category-, template- ... etc (text-)namespace), because it is IMHO apropriate
for each (huamn-readable) textual namespace.
SVG has a (I guess historcial) exception, because it was new and was sorted in
like (bitmap-) graphics (JPEG/PNG or what ever exists only on wikipedia)
(badly classified IMHO).
I don't think that version control we offer with article revisions
is a proper one for any kind of XML, including SVGs. For git fanbois:
yes, git does not solve that, either.
Sorry, but "For git fanbois: yes, git
does not solve that, either." sounds like
Chinese language for me. :-/ I have a feeling what git is, but see no
connection. Maybe I think of the wrong git version control system.
The problem is that you have to think in terms of
nodes, their attributes
Have I? Or do you think I should? And if you mean SVG-nodes,
this you also
must with article (as I wrote) with <math>, <ref>, ''', ===
section === , ...
and contents and not their textual form. I pretty
often add/remove
spaces and newlines when editing XML by hand for clarity; that should
not be versioned as this does not change the substance.
? It should IMHO -- you are
right typically this kind (whitespace) is only for
human-readbale. But should I download for each such white-space change a new
complete file on the other hand? Inserting whitespaces for readablity I also
do for articles/talks/categorys/... and thus it is in version-control, too.
And what if you like to change "red" to "#ff2000" or "2.0"
in "-2.01" in a
certain statement? It would GREAT to have (like in any article)
version-control/diff-stuff! I want to see exactly what has changed -- like in any
text-editing.
What is your point to not like to support this idea, I wonder?
I am editing SVG files by hand pretty often (using vi
for simple things
and XMLmind's xxe for more complex stuff) to fix various problems
related by users, like missing namespaces, wrong CSS, etc.
I too, using vim -- but
I do much more logical content-work in SVG-coding.
But I wouldn't really want to do that within some
textarea
interface within MediaWiki. Maybe, for the purpose of educating
It is nearly
irrelavant (for me) whether I'm editing an article or a SVG-code
inside a textarea on wikimedia. On the other hand it is like I'm always
forced to download a part of an article to edit it locally and then uplaod the
new version like it is now for SVG! :-( This is the important (in my opinion
not justified by a useful or only mentioned reason here et al) point. :-/
The syntax-SVG changing of VIM (supported by colors) is to bad for my typical
hand made errors to be significant helpful -- maybe I simple doesn't make such
cheap errors often. E.g. I sometimes close a <g ... with /g> in the same
line wrongly and only get later the error when displaying at </g>. No syntax-
color help for this kind which would help a little bit. So syntax-check for
editing is a total different issue -- then support to easily recognize
textual differences/changes in versions. And with this missing you even trigger
people NOT to change/correct the old version but more (if they finally like)
make a full new version totaly independ of the old version. :-(
Remove version-control-diff-stuff from articles, force all people to change
articles only offline and uploaded again for new versions then you will/might
get a feeling what would be done magnificantly by adding the version-control-
diff-stuff to all SVG-text.
users, there should be some way to pretty print XML
source
of the SVG file - but unless there is a decent XML node editor
I don't think we this is something we need right now.
I again wonder why people
are obvouisly unable/unwilling to distinguish or only
to imagine, that SVG-editing (or editing of human readable text in general) is
totally (logical) independent of version-control-diff-stuff of such content.
:-( Unbelievable. :-(
Thanks for your thoughts (even if a lot are off the point),
Achim