Return-path: X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.1.7-deb Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Tue, 15 May 2007 16:10:45 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ho6A0-00038G-PG; Tue, 15 May 2007 16:10:32 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Tue, 15 May 2007 16:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ho69M-000385-3H for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Tue, 15 May 2007 16:09:49 -0700 Received: from express.cec.wustl.edu ([128.252.21.16]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ho698-00037l-IP for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Tue, 15 May 2007 16:09:47 -0700 Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (hive.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.14]) by express.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id l4FN9PJa007619 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 May 2007 18:09:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4FN9O9a016021; Tue, 15 May 2007 18:09:24 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id l4FN9OIj016018; Tue, 15 May 2007 18:09:24 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hive.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 18:09:24 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Subject: [jbovlaste] Process for adding new words Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 3631 Lines: 70 So talking with Robin and others on IRC, I was encouraged to try out the process of adding a new lujvo to jbovlaste. The process reminded me of why it's been a few years since I've attempted it. I'm writing about my experiences, to try to show those who have been initiated how it looks to outsiders. Pretend you aren't familiar with it. At the end, I try to explain how it *should* work. Feel free to tell me if my "should work" glosses over something important, but the whole idea is about streamlining. I really shouldn't have to submit more than a single form to do everything (probably with one other form to say "yes, all of that is indeed what I wanted"). First a general note about the language of all the forms. They seem to be written to instill as much anxiety as possible. "Are you sure you really, honestly, and truly know what you're doing? Really? Ok, then hit the button five times, and maybe it'll work." Basically, everything makes it sound error prone, "well, it looks like that word got added correctly. I think." Not confidence instilling. But aside from that, the process is much more complicated than it should be. To test, I added {kafxu'i}, "caffeine". So first I put the word into the box, and click the "Add the word" button. It warns me about how horrible a thing it is to contribute, but if I'm *really* sure...so it's added. At least, it tells me it thinks it probably added it, but I should go there just to make sure. At this point, the word has no definition. I'm not sure how often people want to add words without defining them, but there you go. I go to add a definition. Ok, twenty different boxes to fill out. Lots of hyperlinked help files. Not too bad, though. Fill in the definition. Fill in the gloss word (I've only got one). Click ok. Now we come to the most annoying part of the whole process. It doesn't know that "caffeine" is a word. Of course it's a word, or I wouldn't have just used it, you moron. So now I need to go through a completely different form to add it. Have to click ok twice (where the second time seems to be just to annoy me, "are you really sure?"). Great, now I'm at "caffeine". Now I have to go back in my history, and resubmit the original definition. Now I have to go *back* to the gloss word to vote for it. At least I automatically voted for my own definition. Here's how I'd much rather see things go. "Adding" {kafxu'i} takes me straight to the "add a definition" page. No need to add the word until it's got a definition. After I fill out the form, it checks each of the gloss words and keywords. Then give me a list. "These gloss words exist. Your new definition will link to them. These words don't exist yet; they will be created. If any of that isn't what you want, edit your definition". Then I click "ok" once, and it goes away to add all the records at once. It lets me know (really!) whether everything worked, and tells me "Cool, added". While it's at it, it should vote for anything it needs to. If there are any problems, let me know, but don't bother me about it unless you have to. I understand that we're really creating records in a lot of different tables to add one definition, but from a user's point of view, I'm adding one thing, and everything else is implementation details. That was probably pretty ranty, but there it is. -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ 'You are a very fine person, Mr Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all!' 'Thank goodness!' said Bilbo laughing, and handed him the tobacco-jar.