[Foundation-l] Why is MediaWiki so low-tech?

Sun Jan 7 20:15:39 UTC 2007

At 17:49 +0000 7/1/07, Virgil Ierubino wrote:
>To follow up some of the replies:
>
>I'm not suggesting WYSIWYG. I don't like Wysiwyg personnally, I think it
>makes content editing more difficult and less clear.
>
>My point in its simplest form was that there ARE ways of doing VERY funky
>stuff. And I don't mean flashing animations, I mean stuff that actually
>makes MediaWiki run better, be easier to use, attract more users, etc.
>
>Compatibility isn't that much of an issue because:
>* The features can be opt-in via user preferences (could even be as simple
>as selecting one of 3 modes, or something)
>* This kind of funky stuff IS actually very stable, and can even detect the
>browser it's being viewed in and turn itself off.
>* Most people CAN run it without problems.
>
>For the Somalians without Dell Dimensions, (interesting example!) there's
>always the normal Wikipedia (before turning on these options), CDs, DVDs and
>Print Encyclopedias.

Well, I am user in the UK and I have mobile phone.  I often edit 
Mediawiki based wikis on the phone. Just basic stuff.

>If lack of developers and money is the only problem then why not be more
>WIKI about it?

Money pays for servers. Developers work for nothing.

>Call to the Wikimedian community for volunteer coders to help
>improve MediaWiki. Of course this is a lot more complex than I make it
>sound, but the point is that somewhere out there will be a professional AJAX
>coder willing to code free for Wikimedia. I know that if I knew the
>language, I'd do it.

AJAX? Are you serious? Most of these interfaces are way beyond what 
Wikipedia calls for.

I have had one request from a wiki I run for a local history group - 
a spell checker. Everything else they like (the group had TWiki 
experience from another project).

Anyway, like somebody else, feel free to contribute...

-- 
Gordo (an amateur)

http://www.loopzilla.org/