Last modified: 2007-02-13 18:48:04 UTC
== Usability .... ==
is there any Chance to get modern Usability at MediaWiki 2.0 in the Future ?
It has to be a joke that there are allready Corefunctions at MediaWiki are missing :
* ACL - a professional one with own Group adding/editing and overview like a modern CMS
or Forum has.
* A PlugIn System like DokuWiki and the most CMS and Forums have.
* A Updateskript like the Installskript that MediaWiki has.
* A modern Discussionfunction like a Forum and not these fu***** Articlediscussion that
are allready there and that nobody really likes.
* Modern Userprofiles and Options.
* Ajax Support
* Out-of-the-Box SEO Features
* BB-Code Support and a modern Editor for all Users needs.
* Buttons at Editor so that User can get involved without getting nerved by this fu*****
Wikisyntax learning for Corefunctions (Redirect, Tables etc.)
* Real Privatemessagingsupport
It seems like MediaWiki Developers never used any other Webbased Software since Years.
MediaWiki is not 2007 - it is still 1997.
Remember - the best Authors of Non-Computergenres are not Computergeeks.
Just take a look at DokuWiki - this is still not perfect - but some of the Features
hardly missed at MediaWiki are allready there or usable by PlugIns. Move forward
MediaWiki Team - you are still backwards.
At last - if you think some of these Features are useless - ok - let every Admin decide
by him self if he wants to activate it at the Adminpanel or not.
I'm closing this as an ignorant, disorganised rant containing multiple issues
and borderline trolling.
Ok - no chance for modernising MediaWiki and
ignorance on Userwishes.
When filing requests, file a single request per bug. Give a little more detail.
Don't troll. Don't compare MediaWiki to other wiki engines and insult the
development team. Understand the scope of MediaWiki and know what features won't
be accepted. Check for duplicate issues. Check previous discussion on these
issues. Don't whinge.
First of all: please be aware that MediaWiki is almost entirely a volunteer
project. Yelling at us or insulting MW will only make us more irritated and
less likely to listen (see Rob's response). And MediaWiki is free, too, so it
seems a bit unreasonable to get *angry* when it's missing features you want,
although disappointment is fair enough.
Second of all: report separate requests as separate bugs. This allows us to
address each one by itself. Each of your specific points about usability should
be filed as a separate request. Where you have made a request I understand, I
have either pointed you to an existing bug that you can vote for or suggested
that you file one or more new bugs.
Now, to address your points:
(In reply to comment #0)
> * ACL - a professional one with own Group adding/editing and overview like a
> or Forum has.
MediaWiki is not designed for much access control. It is designed to be
basically open, with certain limitations for sanity. It is absolutely
deliberate that there are only a handful of possible rights. Some more
modularity may be expected in the future, such as the addition in 1.9 or 1.10 of
per-namespace editing restriction.
Because there are so few possible rights, it is unlikely that you'll need more
than a few groups. We don't have a pretty in-wiki GUI for most settings, no,
mainly because the people who run the Wikimedia servers (i.e., the ones
MediaWiki is primarily targeted at) are generally proficient enough in
programming to be perfectly comfortable editing PHP files to change settings.
Some of these may be migrated to easier-to-use in-wiki interfaces in the future,
but many likely not (see also bug 6952).
> * A PlugIn System like DokuWiki and the most CMS and Forums have.
MediaWiki has hooks, which you can use to create your own extensions. A list
can be found in docs/hooks.txt.
> * A Updateskript like the Installskript that MediaWiki has.
MediaWiki has an update script, in maintenance/update.php. Unfortunately, it
currently can only be run from a command line, but that's something that we
would be happy to fix if someone submitted a patch. It is not very
high-priority because, again, MediaWiki is primarily designed for Wikimedia
Foundation use, and the WMF has dedicated servers.
> * A modern Discussionfunction like a Forum and not these fu*****
> are allready there and that nobody really likes.
This is an area that we're interested in, but nobody is working on it at the
moment. There was some work on this over the last summer in the form of
LiquidThreads, which will probably be picked up again at some point, but there
are no timeframes for implementation. This is bug 1234.
> * Modern Userprofiles and Options.
The word "modern" is not itself very descriptive. More specific suggestions can
be opened as new bugs.
> * Ajax Support
Ajax is slowly being added for various things, where appropriate. At the
moment, the keyword here is "slowly", because we're mainly a volunteer project
and no one is doing much work in this regard. If you have specific suggestions
for features that can use Ajax, file enhancement requests for them. (See also:
bug 2837, bug 4427, bug 5560, bug 6593.)
> * Socialbookmarking
MediaWiki is not designed for social sites. However, this might make a good
extension. You can file a bug report asking for someone to write one. Again,
progress will likely be slow because the WMF is not interested in this kind of
thing, but third parties might be interested in writing such an extension.
> * Out-of-the-Box SEO Features
Any specific suggestions you have should be filed as bug reports. MediaWiki is
generally pretty decent in the SEO department, as far as I know, but if you have
any ideas for improvements please share them.
> * BB-Code Support and a modern Editor for all Users needs.
There are difficulties in changing the current editing syntax, essentially
because of momentum (Wikipedians are used to it, and there are millions of pages
written in it). You may be interested in the Wikiwyg extension being actively
developed by Wikia, but note that it is not yet very suitable for general use.
> * Buttons at Editor so that User can get involved without getting nerved by
> Wikisyntax learning for Corefunctions (Redirect, Tables etc.)
There are already some buttons in the default installation. More can be added
by editing [[MediaWiki:Common.js]] (or [[MediaWiki:Monobook.js]] for pre-1.9).
If you have specific suggestions for new buttons, please file separate bug reports.
> * Real Privatemessagingsupport
MediaWiki is not designed for closed discussion, and the lack of private
messages is deliberate. It would be possible to design an extension to add this.
> It seems like MediaWiki Developers never used any other Webbased Software
> MediaWiki is not 2007 - it is still 1997.
MediaWiki's interface received its only (AFAIK) major overhaul over a year ago,
with Monobook's release in 1.5. Modern features such as Ajax are gradually
> Just take a look at DokuWiki - this is still not perfect - but some of the
> hardly missed at MediaWiki are allready there or usable by PlugIns. Move forward
> MediaWiki Team - you are still backwards.
> At last - if you think some of these Features are useless - ok - let every
> by him self if he wants to activate it at the Adminpanel or not.
Writing them remains the problem. Most (probably all) of the developers are
interested primarily in Wikimedia applications, and so most of us aren't
interested in doing much work that will never be enabled on MediaWiki.
In general, MediaWiki may not be the best wiki software for uses not in line
with, basically, Wikipedia. MediaWiki is designed and maintained basically for
Wikipedia and its sister projects, and I think it's probably the best wiki
software for those purposes. If the purpose of your site is radically different
from that of Wikipedia, it is quite probable that other wiki software is better,
or non-wiki software. We do not obligate you to use MediaWiki, and for most
purposes it is absolutely not the best software.