WikkaDevelopment:Wikka

Revision [5591]

This is an old revision of WikkaDevelopment made by NilsLindenberg on 2005-02-04 15:27:25.

Wikka Development

Last edited by NilsLindenberg:
moved /deleted discussions
Fri, 04 Feb 2005 15:27 UTC [diff]

The next release

the following things will be added/updated/fixed in the next release

For the next minor release

SQL instructions in seperate file

For ease of development, I'd move the SQL instructions for creating the default tables and pages during setup to two external .sql files, the first for table structure, the second for data (DarTar)

God idea. I'll look into the implementation.... (JsnX)

For the next major release

Page-Caching

please give us back the "no cache" option on edit pages :)

Right now, no pages are being cached. So what you really want is for caching to be brought back, with the option to disable it on certain pages, right? It's quite a few changes, so it probably won't be in the upcoming minor release. -- JsnX

PagedComments

Your thoughts about PagedComments? (DarTar)

User-skins

TestSkin user skins (with new WikkaSkinOptimization css template); (DarTar)

Documenation

WikkaDocumentation shipped with the installation (or maybe IncludeRemote not); (DarTar)

Need to be done

We should update the infos on syntax highlighting in the default FormattingRules page (add wikkas build-in formatters again)

installer:

install.php does not remove /actions/wakkabug.php

main:

wikka.php:

(499) RE for InterWiki link not the same as in (formatter) wakka.php

handlers:

edit.php

(3) check for valid page name should be done only for new pages (done??)

actions:

mychanges does not really sort by last change (see SandBox)

newpage: badly written (no input validation (will break if no page name submitted); superfluous hidden field used to detect submitted state; invalid XHTML): rewrite if we need it at all (note: mentioned on WikkaBugsResolved with a code change but this change isn't present in 1.1.6.0beta! So it's not resolved, and unchanged from 1.1.5.3). I think it's much better to remove it though.

Well, I think I'd suggest adding it to the 3rd party plugin directory then. Although for you sorts that action doesn't seem necessary, for the community of kids that I work with, it's something that I anticipate will be the main way they make pages at first. By all means improve the action so that it cannot be blank (I raised this initially I think), and that so a regex checks for camelcasing, but I think it should be available somewhere & the 3rd party plugins directory would suit. -- GmBowen

How hard is it for them to learn to use a Wiki in a Wiki-way? There are already two ways to create a page - referring to one and then creating it from the missing link being the best (and easiest) and it will not leave any orphans (which should be discouraged anyway!); this is not that hard (no URLs, no code, just using the Wiki). Surely highschool kids can learn something - don't underestimate them. ;-) --JW

Oh, I don't underestimate them, they can learn the "normal" way of making a page. But the create page action is a good scaffold towards that....and scaffolding is important. Also, I'm working on a separate environment for grade 6/7/8...for those age groups it'll be even more useful. And, in my experience with people playing with this wiki (my undergrads), many people start with making orphaned pages, and then organize them so they're unorphaned and can find them more easily. (HOW do they make orphaned pages then? The newpage action actually encourages making orphaned pages, something that should be avoided. If they're not using a newpage action then obviously they don't need that to create orphans. :)) As for using the normal wiki-way to create pages, I'm a pretty competent computer nerd and I found (and find) the normal way of making wiki pages awkward. If I want to start a new page for some reason, having to open another page to write the name, save it, and then click on the link to go to the new page to edit it is "annoying" in that it takes so much work. (But it's the only way to ensure the page will not be orphaned to begin with. Wikis are about interlinking pages easily, orphans don't have a place in that.) Kids (and other users I would argue) will want to start a new page like they do in a word processor...one or two clicks only (and in my environment the URL bar is hidden, so they can't do it that way). (Where "will want" suggests assumption rather than research - if they can learn to use a word processor they certainly can learn to use a Wiki. A Wiki is not a word processor - why should it work the same? It would create an incorrect mental model. Creating links is about the easiest part of using a Wiki - and the most essential!) Wiki-think is that you make structure as you make content (that's essentially what you're describing). But many people don't work (or think) that way....disparate content first, then structure it....I know numerous academics that write that way in fact. (In fact, on this site I make a new page first, get it the way I want, and then go and add links.....I just use the URL bar to do it) The "make new page" action allows wikka to support both sorts of approaches, and that means more appealing to more people. (But Wikka should not encourage creating orphans - which is what the newpage action does - and if you really must Wikka already supports it: you can use the address bar to make a new URL. That's sufficient.) An old DOS program, Tornado notes, worked this way too. You added bunches of content that you could search on, but in use you then added keywords (like we do in wikka with categories) to provide organizational structure in searches. --GmBowen

image does not have alt required (necessary for valid XHTML; no default should be provided); a specified blank value (zero or more spaces) should be accepted as given. Also remove the meaningless default title attribute value: use no title unless specified as an action code.

To present it a different way, My understanding of why the alt tag is needed is because it is picked up by screen readers (literally, readers) to assist visually impaired people with "reading" the page...I suspect that's one of the reasons that it's in the standards in the first place. -- GmBowen

Older discussions

We should create a default page called WikkaDocumentation containing the following code (in the future it will contain the actual documentation or a plugin to fetch remote documentation):

===== Wikka Documentation ===== 
A comprehensive and up-to-date documentation on Wikka Wiki can be found on the 
[[http://wikka.jsnx.com/WikkaDocumentation main Wikka server]]

Agreed. --JavaWoman

For the time being, what about creating a default page called WikkaReleaseNotes containing a static link to the online WikkaReleaseNotes? (see my note above on why creating or overwriting a page during upgrade is not really a problem) -- DarTar

Actually, I'd like to see our current ReleaseNotes page here renamed to WikkaReleaseNotes; pages relating to Wikka itself really should start with 'Wikka': we already have WikkaDevelopment, WikkaBugs, WikkaBugsResolved, etc. (why not WikkaDocumentation?) - WikkaReleaseNotes would neatly fit into that pattern and be clearer than just "ReleaseNotes". Then someone writing about, say, a Calendar can create a page like FancyCalendarWikkaReleaseNotes etc.
I agree with DarTar that a page with a static link to the online release notes here, to be included with the install, would be a good temporary solution; to be replaced later by a mechanism like FetchRemote (once finished - but let's not wait for that!) (Note: edited somewhat for readablity - we now do have WikkaReleaseNotes and WikkaDocumentation as suggested.) --JavaWoman

I propose we update the default HomePage to display the version number, a WikkaReleaseNotes what's new link pointing to the WikkaReleaseNotes and a link to WikkaDocumentation. Here's my source code proposal for the new default HomePage

=====Welcome to your Wikka site! ===== 
Thanks for installing [[Wikka:HomePage WikkaWiki]]! This site is running on version {{version}} (see WikkaReleaseNotes).
Double-click on this page or click on the "edit page" link at the bottom to get started.

Also don't forget to visit the [[Wikka:HomePage WikkaWiki website]]!

Useful pages: FormattingRules, WikkaDocumentation, OrphanedPages, WantedPages, TextSearch.

BTW a stupid action for printing in the body of a page the current Wikka version as declared in the config file might be useful;

OK.

This should do it:

<?php
echo $this->VERSION;
?>

Save as actions/version.php --JavaWoman (who for once doesn't document what she writes. ;o) )

Here it comes: this is Wikka version Unknown action ""version"". I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have such basic system plugins handled by the wikka formatter, instead of using an action. And maybe in the future {{version}} will print a link (fetchable or not) to WikkaReleaseNotes? -- DarTar

If Nils is ready with the new version in a couple of days, replace the current FormattingRules with an more structured page.

I'm in Rom till sunday so don't expect big changes before monday. Nils

Do we still need two different actions colour/color ? I would drop the British one.

Dropped. Geez, in the whole wide world it's only the Americans who spell it without the "u"....so we keep the U.S. spelling? Ironic.

spelling is ironic - you can always add a colour action yourself containing nothing but an include of actions/color.php, if you must. :) --JavaWoman

Liberia???? Japan I get (beaten in war). OAS I get (sucking up to U.S. ;) ). LIBERIA??? Liberia I don't get. (Simple, look up the history of Liberia; knowing that I could easily guess they'd be using American English(oh ya, I see what you mean. I'd forgotten that bit of history.). And where did you think the name Liberia came from? --JW) BTW, I didn't mean that spelling was ironic, I meant that the decision was, given efforts by various members on this wiki to "internationalize" the wiki. (Or, I could rename the file. Writing an action to include an action is a programmer's solution obviously. LOL ;-} ) -- Mike

Shouldn't we announce in the WikkaReleaseNotes that the raw handler has been modified?

Sure.

CategoryDevelopment

Wikka : WikkaDevelopment

Revision [5591]