[00:47:21] greg-g: yt? [00:49:10] DarTar: about to not be, what's up? [16:57:12] Language Engineering office hour starts in this channel in less than 5 minutes [17:00:26] #startmeeting Language Engineering monthly office hour - December 2014 [17:00:26] Meeting started Wed Dec 10 17:00:26 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is arrbee. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. [17:00:26] Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. [17:00:26] The meeting name has been set to 'language_engineering_monthly_office_hour___december_2014' [17:00:40] Hello, Welcome to the monthly office hour of the Wikimedia Language Engineering team [17:01:41] I am Runa and with me today from our team are aharoni jsahleen pginer Nikerabbit [17:01:57] kart may also join in a while [17:02:06] o/ [17:02:24] Hello Niharika... good to see you as always :) [17:02:26] Hello everyone. Hi arrbee. [17:02:30] :) Same here! [17:03:08] Logs from the last office hour are at: [17:03:15] #link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2014-11-12 [17:03:20] Salut! [17:03:36] And today's conversation will also be logged and publicly posted [17:04:05] A lot of people on the channel are already aware of what we do :) [17:04:29] But in case its the first time you are attending this meeting - we are the Language Engineering team of the Wikimedia Foundation [17:04:48] We help maintain MediaWiki and the Wikimedia websites in more than 300 languages from around the world [17:05:10] Our team page is at: [17:05:14] #link https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_engineering [17:06:03] For the past few months we have been working on the Content Translation tool which can be used to create new Wikipedia articles by translating an existing article in another language [17:07:03] The tool is hosted on the Wikimedia beta servers and already being used for creating articles in the Catalan, Spanish and Portuguese Wikipedias [17:07:24] And a few other Wikipedias also, quite recently [17:07:52] We recently completed development of the 3rd version [17:08:12] There will be blog post about the announcement later today or tomorrow [17:08:36] Meanwhile you can read the release announcement at: [17:08:39] #link https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation/Announcement-November2014 [17:09:11] So I will quickly start with some updates about the new features we added and continue the conversation as it flows [17:09:48] Until now we were very focused on the translation interface thats called 'Translation View' [17:10:17] Its the editing interface and translation tools like machine translation, link cards, dictionary etc. [17:10:35] n this version, we have added a new feature - Translation Dashboard [17:10:39] In* [17:10:53] Here is a screenshot of what it looks like: [17:10:59] #link https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Content-Translation-User-Dashboard.png [17:11:51] So if you have attempted to translate at least one article since sometime last week, you will be able to view this dashboard [17:12:16] kart_ may have the exact dates from when it has been available [17:12:47] The articles that have been published in the user namespace are marked as 'published' [17:13:23] Dec 4. [17:13:23] The articles that are marked as 'draft' have been saved automatically since the user began translating it [17:13:38] So definitely last week. Thanks kart_ [17:14:20] Thats the second big feature we added - automatic saving as you translate [17:14:50] From this dashboard, the user can: [17:15:07] 1. Continue working on the unfinished translations [17:15:20] 2. Open the published article page [17:16:00] At this point of time, users cannot reload a published article in the translation interface [17:16:03] and [17:16:16] they cannot view translations made by any other user [17:16:41] * arrbee stops for a while to check if there are any questions [17:17:13] okay moving on [17:17:22] There is one important announcement: [17:18:03] You cannot go directly into the Special:ContentTranslation page any longer i.e. the page that had the language and article selector [17:18:37] On the beta wikis where everyone has been translating since July, we have now enabled Content Translation as a beta feature [17:19:33] If you haven't auto-enrolled for beta-features, then you'll have to turn it on and then go to the special page like before [17:19:46] #link http://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation [17:20:26] If you are not logged in and if you haven't enabled the beta-feature, then that link above will show you an error - 'No such special page' [17:21:08] The reason we did this is because **drumroll** we are now preparing to include the tool as a beta feature in several Wikipedias [17:22:17] We are currently making the final list of Wikis based on user feedback, community requests and other criteria like machine translation quality [17:23:02] The first round of deployment will be completed sometime in mid-January [17:23:37] We have been running a survey to get inputs on some the languages that we wanted to evaluate [17:24:16] In a few weeks we should be able to announce the full list and more details on how thats going to happen [17:24:32] To clarify, these are REAL WIKIPEDIAS. Not testing or Beta sites. [17:24:49] But the feature will have to be enabled through preferences. [17:25:01] I did the **drumroll**. But I think CAPITALS work better :D [17:25:49] It wouldn't be a big list though, possibly just under 10 wikis [17:26:31] But Catalan, Spanish and Portuguese are strong candidates mostly because of their inclusion in the early stages [17:26:49] So that I think is the end of my update [17:28:03] aharoni: Did you want to add anything more about the updates from the new release [17:28:05] ? [17:29:20] * arrbee looks for the link to the language evaluation survey [17:29:54] https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/forms/d/1JzM2VAbd14bA5NpsMoxzbVO5Njw_bic4V5qtiuScX70/viewform [17:30:55] Please feel free to add your feedback about any language pairs you would like to see in Content Translation [17:31:57] Meanwhile we are well into the release cycle of the next version [17:32:12] The planned features are listed at: [17:32:15] #link https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation/Roadmap/CX03Release [17:33:09] And we will be doing an entire sprint for bug fixing and testing [17:34:12] jsahleen: There were some alignment related bugs that were quite distracting on the translation interface. I believe you are checking through them currently. Would you like to say something about that? [17:34:28] Nothing special to add except our enormous excitement about all of this. [17:34:55] arbee: That's actually aharoni who is working on the alignment bugs. :) [17:35:36] ahh ok :) [17:35:39] aharoni: ^^ [17:36:53] arrbee: One thing we should mention is the new annotation mapping algorithm developed by sthottingal. [17:37:03] Very true [17:37:16] It's quite brilliant and will work with a variety of languages. [17:37:34] I don't think it can be demo-ed easily at this point time [17:37:50] Maybe we can write about it. Santhosh defintely was planning to document it. [17:38:11] You won't see much on the interface, but it is the magic that makes sure all the html tags and such end up in the right place when doing machine translation. [17:39:26] Like formatting tags [17:40:09] It's a matter of *not* having to do formatting work in the translation. [17:41:29] Thats right [17:42:04] Okay I don't think there are many questions for us today, so we can stop early :) [17:42:48] aharoni: jsahleen: kart_: Would you like to speak a little about the OPW projects you are mentoring this time? [17:47:25] Alright, possibly we can take that up in the next office hour after some progress has been made on the two projects [17:48:06] If there are no questions, I will wrap up now. [17:48:17] This ends the last office hour of year 2014 [17:48:41] We will be back on 14th January 2015, but do lookout for the announcements for the exact date [17:49:02] Our mailing list is mediawiki-i18n@lists.wikimedia.org and IRC channel is #mediawiki-i18n [17:49:23] You can also connect with us on Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/language-engineering/ [17:49:37] Thanks everyone! [17:49:43] #endmeeting [17:49:44] Meeting ended Wed Dec 10 17:49:43 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) [17:49:44] Minutes: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-17.00.html [17:49:44] Minutes (text): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-17.00.txt [17:49:44] Minutes (wiki): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-17.00.wiki [17:49:44] Log: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-17.00.log.html [20:40:18] I sent an email to emergency@wikimedia.org about 20 minutes ago. Can someone confirm that it's been received and acted on please? [20:48:37] gadfium: I've asked a few people, but I think most of LCA (who get those emails) are not on IRC at the moment [20:48:45] And it's lunch hour in San Francisco, which may be the reason [20:49:08] Thank you. Should I follow this up with local police myself? [20:50:41] Possibly, if you think it's a viable threat - see https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/22/wikimedia-foundation-emergency-response-system/ for some information on what our team looks for [20:52:35] It seems viable to me. I'll email the police and probably talk to them on the phone as well. [20:53:18] Thanks, gadfium. I'm sure when LCA gets to it they'll follow-up. [21:00:30] #startmeeting RFC meeting [21:00:31] Meeting started Wed Dec 10 21:00:31 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is TimStarling. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. [21:00:32] Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. [21:00:32] The meeting name has been set to 'rfc_meeting' [21:00:54] #topic Drop actions in favour of page views and special pages | RFC meeting | PLEASE SCHEDULE YOUR OFFICE HOURS: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours | Please note: Channel is logged and publicly posted (DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTE) | Logs: http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/ [21:01:05] #link https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Drop_actions_in_favour_of_page_views_and_special_pages [21:02:45] this is an interesting RFC [21:03:48] anyone here interested in talking about it? [21:04:59] one thing I'd like to know is: what is bad about actions, and what is good about special pages, that makes us want to switch from one to the other? [21:06:07] just me then? [21:07:20] TimStarling: hm, kinda lonely [21:07:30] hi [21:07:35] * aude waves [21:07:38] yay, 3 people [21:07:44] :) [21:08:13] so... why would we want to keep action=x? and if we don't, how do we migrate away from it? [21:08:37] we don't want to break links, right? so, redirect it to the corresponding special page? [21:08:39] it's a bit weird for history to be an action [21:08:46] as I understand it, actions and specials pages have basically the same interfaces, except they're exposed in the UI differently [21:08:47] but the others not sure as much [21:08:58] and we have weirdness like ?action=delete but Special:Undelete [21:08:58] the RFC is actually rather subtle on URL mapping [21:09:00] action=edit kind of makes sense [21:09:07] Special:Edit... i don't know... [21:09:18] it suggests moving everything to special pages, but keeping action= parameters [21:09:24] in particular moving Special:Search to action=search [21:09:45] I think Special:Edit makes sense, because then you have Special:VisualEditor/Foo, Special:WikiEditor/Foo, and Special:Edit just redirects you to whatever your default preference is [21:09:48] you know this is by Daniel Friesen who IIRC also submitted the path routing RFC [21:10:17] the main difficulty is robots.txt [21:10:18] i don't think of search as an action [21:10:20] legoktm: so, editors for different content types would have different urls, too? [21:10:29] actions tend to be page specific although not required [21:10:29] maybe [21:10:36] he suggests moving search to /w/ mostly so that it will be easily disallowed in robots.txt [21:10:53] hm [21:11:38] I don't think we'd want a Special:View though. [21:11:54] TimStarling: the division between action and specila page is currently kind of arbitrary. if we want to have both, we should have a clear distinction when to use what [21:12:12] the idea is to remove actions entirely and to have action=search literally map to title=Special:Search, at the path routing level [21:13:00] currently actions act on an article, and some special pages also act on articles [21:13:47] DanielK_WMDE_: it reflects uncertainty about what special pages and actions are for, right from the beginning [21:13:52] maybe special pages could declare whetehr they want to be available as an action [21:13:56] Having special pages use action= would bring the url structure of index.php closer to api.php [21:14:08] we could get rid of the Action class and so on. [21:14:21] the migration path for extensions using the UnknownAction hook is unclear to me though [21:14:29] gadfium: join #wikimedia-operations [21:14:53] mmm, actions are more tightly related to pages they're acting upon. maybe, it's just a matter of habit for me though [21:15:09] yeah, actions are more tightly related in the code also [21:15:33] special pages just have an unstructured subpage parameter, which the special page is free to interpret as a title if it wishes [21:15:34] legoktm: i'd say *some* special pages. there should be a flag for that. if that is set, /wiki/Foo?action=bar would map to /wikki/Special:Bar/Foo [21:15:49] whereas actions have a Page object passed to their constructors [21:16:01] actions are more like controllers, somewhat [21:16:17] wut? mvc in my mediawikiz? [21:16:19] :P [21:16:24] :D [21:16:34] they do a lot of things [21:16:42] so, the question is how the two should be mapped/related on a) the URL level and b) in the code. [21:16:54] Do we want an ActionSpecialPage base class? [21:16:56] then some , like view, don't do anything (delegating to article) [21:17:05] one thing that is not discussed in the RFC at all is localisation [21:17:17] you know that special page names are localised whereas action names are not [21:17:44] it is mentioned [21:17:53] .oO(Spezial:Ausfuhr) [21:17:59] > and also bringing the special page i18n to actions so things like ?title=Foo&action=移動 will work too. [21:18:48] special page localisation already makes log analysis pretty tricky [21:18:53] i'm not sure that's a good thing... [21:19:21] yea, if we keep action=, it should be as an api-of-sorts, so it should use canonical identifiers [21:19:40] also, there is often mixup about what is context title (special page) and target [21:19:52] in special pages that deal with pages [21:20:05] would hope we can clear that up, either way [21:21:22] so, we do a Special:Delete instead of action=delete - what title would be referenced in context? [21:21:42] I see a problem with this [21:21:47] presumably the whole thing [21:21:56] Special:Delete/Foo [21:22:21] e.g. if you hook to action=delete you know for sure what page is being deleted [21:22:44] with special pages, you have to parse titles [21:23:16] TimStarling: while with action=, the target page would be in the context [21:23:28] or introduce someting like SpecialPage::getPageBeingActedUpon(), confusing [21:23:37] i can imagine this causing confusion :/ [21:23:48] #info so, we do a Special:Delete instead of action=delete - what title would be referenced in context? [21:23:58] sure, it's a good point [21:24:45] obviously if you hook Special:RecentChangesLinked or something then you already have that problem [21:24:49] so, how about allowing special pages to also register as actions, with a well defined mapping. [21:25:26] that would allow us to slowly migrate away from Action. if it's convenient. [21:25:36] and if it's inconvenient and nobody uses it, no harm done. [21:26:07] uh, "maybe do this or maybe not"? [21:26:09] The ActionSpecialPage baseclass should handle the getTargetTitle() bit, and would automatically get the subpage set when called via action= [21:26:56] the_nobodies: i'd suggesting to add a new way to implement actions. without the need to port all existing actions immediately. [21:27:21] i'd like to try porting a few before making a decision. [21:27:33] well, my concern is that you're proposing to throw it into the sea and see if it can swim [21:27:37] well, it is possible to port progressively under Dantman's proposal also [21:27:58] in Dantman's proposal, all special pages would be immediately exposed as actions [21:28:10] but that is not harmful if nobody links to those or uses them [21:28:41] then code can be progressively moved from includes/action to includes/specials [21:28:57] mw development rule #1: if you give users a feature, they abuse it in ways you never imagined [21:29:37] right. i just fear that the new way of calling special pages may cause confusion, e.g. about the title, as mentioned [21:29:46] I think unless we have a rationale for a particular recommendation, it has to be left up to the implementor [21:29:52] MediaWiki makes it much easier to link to special pages than to actions. I suspect most users would continue to use special pages and ignore the action= way of accessing the same thing [21:30:38] I'm more worried about internal APIs consistency at this point [21:32:05] do we have anyone in this channel who is interested in doing implementation work? [21:32:31] * aude runs away :) [21:32:47] say if we reduce scope down to the smallest little change that can work... [21:33:25] "work" in what way? [21:33:49] is the purpose unifying the url structure, or getting rid of Action? [21:34:09] say, optionally exposing a special page as an action [21:34:21] that's what it comes down to, right? [21:34:55] it'd be hundreds of lines at most, not thousands, right? [21:37:03] yea, should be easy enough [21:37:26] hm, writing a special page requires an HTML interface [21:37:32] implementing an action doesn't [21:37:44] are you sure? [21:38:09] Special:Filepath? [21:38:12] well, nither absolutely *requires* it [21:38:24] Special:Export? [21:38:45] they have html interfaces, and are reasoably expected to [21:38:58] I think with either interface, it is basically the same procedure to output non-html content [21:39:08] disable the OutputPage, do your own thing [21:39:15] Special:Raw [21:39:29] sure, but if you write a special page, you actually should provide an html form if no parameters are provided [21:40:00] special pages are never cached. is there a use case where we cache an action other than view? [21:40:37] special pages can set Cache-Control headers in $wgOut if they want [21:40:48] the_nobodies: if you go to Special:Raw without params, what should happen? [21:41:06] I would like to know that, too [21:41:22] i think it should show a form that lets you enter a page name [21:41:26] DanielK_WMDE_: maybe the subclass could provide a standard form [21:41:32] the ActionSpecialPage subclass [21:41:36] yea [21:42:24] we'd want per-action message keys to fill it in [21:42:46] you would at least need a description of what the special page does [21:43:01] would be good to have anyway [21:43:10] could maybe even be exposed via the api [21:43:31] oh and on Special:SpecialPages [21:43:46] the simplest, cheapest thing to do would be to phrase it like a generic error message "This action requires a title. Please enter a title below." [21:43:55] would that get an "Action Pages" section? probably not too useful... [21:44:29] yeah, that is a slight hitch with your ActionSpecialPage idea -- the fact that class hierarchy is already used for the "listed" parameter [21:44:37] UnlistedSpecialPage etc. [21:44:40] TimStarling: yea, but supplying a default makes people lazy :) and we need something for the special pages list anyway [21:45:05] if it has a form when there is no title, then it should be listed [21:45:09] and that is probably ideal [21:45:26] some day I will file a nice feature request for you: extend the search engine to special pages [21:45:27] yea [21:45:56] heh, i like that :) [21:45:58] when there's like 100 special pages, I have often wished there was some way to search the description text for the one I wanted [21:46:11] ctrl-f [21:46:32] autocomplete hook? [21:46:34] TimStarling: api modules, too :) [21:47:27] #info make these actions be listed special pages, and output a form if they have no subtitle [21:48:28] so I am reluctant to make firm decisions here because I think the creative input of the implementor always needs to be respected [21:48:41] because I think that is a very important source of motivation, especially for volunteers [21:49:08] we've identified a number of design considerations, which is good [21:50:10] now we just need someone to update the RFC, right? [21:51:24] we could just post the feedback to the talk page [21:51:28] and link to the log/minutes [21:51:37] yep [21:51:48] I think we're done with this meeting, unless anyone has anything else for the notes [21:52:45] #endmeeting [21:52:47] Meeting ended Wed Dec 10 21:52:45 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) [21:52:47] Minutes: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-21.00.html [21:52:47] Minutes (text): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-21.00.txt [21:52:47] Minutes (wiki): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-21.00.wiki [21:52:48] Log: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-12-10-21.00.log.html