User talk:Yair rand/editor2.js
Contents
Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
---|---|---|
Add quotation option doesn't work | 0 | 17:33, 20 October 2016 |
When I click "add quotation" nothing happens | 0 | 20:56, 14 August 2015 |
bug | 0 | 19:14, 18 July 2015 |
broken links | 2 | 02:15, 14 June 2013 |
whitespace when adding gloss | 4 | 01:52, 12 June 2013 |
Can't use the tool, can't add the definition, don't see any save buttons | 9 | 01:59, 15 December 2011 |
Comments | 0 | 17:16, 18 August 2011 |
Great tool | 0 | 02:16, 18 August 2011 |
When I click "add example", I get boxes I can type in and buttons I can click, but when I click "add quotation", nothing happens at all. When I click "More", I get a box of links, no problem there.
The page I was on was rosca, in the Spanish section.
I know this isn't a great bug report but I don't know what else you want to know.
I can't add a gloss there.--Cinemantique (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, sorry to bother you again but I wanted to mention a couple of cases where punctuation seems to break the sense link:
Anchorencoding the ID seems to fix the problems. support#English-to back a cause, party, etc. mentally or with concrete aid and trademark#English-identification of a company's product now appear to work.
Hi, I've been using the definition editing gadget recently to add glosses, and whenever I add a gloss it adds an extraneous space before the definition, which makes the definition look uneven and forces me to manually edit the page and delete the whitespace, for example here: [1]. I suppose that actually the space was always there, so maybe there's now way around deleting it manually, but in case I'm wrong, is there any way to avoid that step? Thanks
The output looks completely identical to me...
Are you sure that the extra space isn't supposed to be there? In that particular entry, there was a space between the # and the definition before, so I don't really understand why there shouldn't be a space between the senseid template and the definition.
I can see a difference on my system. On Firefox at least, any entry shifts one space to the right whenever I use this tool to add a gloss. It's easier to see on this version [1]. On my browser, adjective sense 2 doesn't line up with the other senses.
Sorry, you were trying to add a new language section?
(Responding on the assumption that you were trying to add a language section but the button wasn't available.) The "Add language" feature is actually part of Tabbed Languages, not editor.js, but it depends on editor.js's section- and definition-editing tools, so it won't load unless those are available. Unfortunately, the current default-on Tabbed Languages admin-only trial relies on using a gadget, so it loads a bunch before editor.js, and when the tabs are being built the tools aren't available, so the "Add language" button isn't added. If you turn off the trial in Special:Preferences and enabled TabbedLanguages and the tools through PREFS or the button that's available in several places (actually, given that you seem to have editor.js enabled already, you probably have both enabled like that already?), then it will work right. (If the problem you're experiencing is something else entirely, I'll need more information in order to fix it.)
Thanks for the reply.
I have had TabbedLanguages enabled for a while.
Let me describe in detail what I' trying to do. It may be a mixture of tools required, I don't know.
- I open the entry عروس (ʿurūs).
- Click on "Add language" link below Arabic.
- Type "Persian" in the window and click "add"
Persian is now visible. In the new window type "Noun". Then preview. Editing transliteration is not possible at this stage but now I can see عروس as the header.
Clicking on definition edit (with a small pencil icon) doesn't allow editing. "Add gloss" doesn't work either - the window is there, I type "bride" but clicking "add" doesn't do anything.
This is where I get stuck. I can't even save what I see - the language heading (Persian) and عروس.
Hi. Just spotted the editor tool and played with it a bit. I find the interface a bit jarring and inconsistent.
The pencil changes the layout of the page by adding indentation – can it be outdented in the left margin, or moved to the end of the line?
But I don't see the reason for a brand-new interface at all. Why not make it consistent with editing in all wikis by changing it to a familiar “[edit]” or “[e]” link on the right? Why change the wording of the standard “(Save page) (Show preview) (Show changes) Cancel” form? The text and bold colours of the buttons are inconsistent with everything else in MediaWiki, and the triangle in “(Preview Changes ▶)” makes it look like a drop-down menu at first glance. I expect “Discard Changes” to be a “Cancel” button that hides the new editing controls, but the “+Add...” links seem to become a permanent part of the page once they appear.
And it took about 45 seconds of consternation before I found the “Page Editing” control in the corner of the window – can it not appear below the edit field? Having action buttons in two places is confusing. I expect the X link to cancel the whole operation, but it only hides the one set of action buttons, and, unexpectedly, does an “undo” operation on the contents of the edit field (which was impossible to realize in most of my test edits, because I was adding text at the end of a long line in a short text field).
And if I click a second edit-pencil on the page, then it's unclear what effect any of the “Page Editing” buttons will have. It might be best if a second pencil-edit would completely cancel and restore other pending pencil-edits. Alternately, when a pencil-edit field is activated, perhaps other pencil buttons on the page should become greyed out and inactive.
The “Redo” button is active by default, but doesn't seem to do anything. The Undo and Redo, associated with Save Changes, look like they will undo a saved change. But instead, they are either a copy of my browser's standard text-editing undo/redo function, or a substitute for my browser's forward/back buttons in the standard edit field, or a strange combination of both.
Sorry to be so critical, but this editing process is confusing. It's neither the familiar, window-context editing routine, nor an AJAX-style field-context or pop-up box-context editing routine (like we've started to get used to in Flickr, Facebook, Twitter, etc), but some strange hybrid with unpredictable behaviour. —Michael Z. 2011-08-18 17:16 z