[00:18:25] Newsletter #139: Refreshing the Function page; Function of the Week: ROT13 - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Updates/2024-01-17 [01:14:05] No. It's on our timeline, but this will take a while to become reality (re @JN_Squire: In there currently a way to call functions from other wikis using Scribunto?) [01:16:14] OK. Thanks for letting me know [01:21:27] When you create an item in a list that is not typed, and have to choose the type, you can tap on the three dots next to the type. This allows you to switch to function call, select "typed list", and then choose a type (can be object). This way you can create nested lists. Did this help? (re @Toby: I can't seem to make a list of lists. I am trying to write a simple test case for [01:21:28] Z12676, but when I make the list object, and ...) [01:26:47] Here we go: Z12809 (re @Toby: Please can someone help write a composition for Z12755 . I tried, using If (Z802), Is empty (Z813) (once as a condition on retur...) [01:28:21] Done (re @Toby: Please can a function maintainer connect my tests for Z810 and disconnect the failed inbuilt one.) [01:30:37] Also done. Thank you for creating these! (re @Toby: I've also made tests for Z889 Z873 Z872) [08:48:11] Nice update! Where would be the preferred place to leave feedback about the new function page? (sorry if it was mentioned here already, I scrolled back a bit but didn't find it) (re @wmtelegram_bot: Newsletter #139: Refreshing the Function page; Function of the Week: ROT13 - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstrac...) [09:48:44] How can I extend my functioneer status? [09:49:26] You can make a request at [[WF:RFG]] [09:50:43] Would merely extending it require discussion? [09:57:51] Not necessarily a discussion, but creating a new section on that page is currently the only way to get the right. [18:34:05] Thanks! Your feedback would be appreciated anywhere suitable, depending on the type and length: Either in here, or in the original thread on Project_chat (top item), or a new thread on Project_chat, or in a new or existing phab task! (re @waldyrious: Nice update! Where would be the preferred place to leave feedback about the new function page? (sorry if it was mentioned here a...) [18:35:37] The link for the project chat item is here: https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Wikifunctions:Project_chat#Function_page_proposal:_looking_for_feedback [19:06:50] Thanks both! It's nothing too elaborate, just two small suggestions. I'll add to the thread in project chat, but I might as well mention them here as well: [19:07:13] @internetam1n is listening :) [19:07:54] anyway, putting them on the Village Pump is better also for transparency and archive reasons, instant messaging is not great when it comes to check past stuff :) [19:07:55] One suggestion is to make the Tests and Implementations tables collapsible, and considering collapsing the Tests table by default (to make the initial view less daunting). [19:09:44] The second suggestion is simply to re-add the "Aliases" label next to the aliases "pills", because the way they look right now conveys (to me at least) a notion of tags, rather than aliases, which may discourage people from adding useful aliases, or encourage them to add aliases that don't really fit that role well. [19:10:18] I'll go ahead and add these to the wiki page now :) [19:16:25] @waldyrious Re: Collapsing, I'd note that it does already limit the default view to 5 entries, and paginates any more than that. I'd also generally advocate caution about "collapsing" things, and I wrote related notes at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Quiddity/Collapsing_and_hiding ! However, it's still a great for you to share your thoughts and concerns about the new desi [19:16:25] gn being potentially daunting. :) [19:16:35] I agree that they look like tags (re @waldyrious: The second suggestion is simply to re-add the "Aliases" label next to the aliases "pills", because the way they look right now c...) [19:28:02] Hi! I've added Wikifunctions to Polish grammar definitions in WikimediaMessages. Is there someone who could review this patch? Or should I ask somewhere else? https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/WikimediaMessages/+/991559 [19:28:49] Msz2001: That's great, thank you! I'll get it merged. [19:28:54] Interesting thoughts about collapsing and hiding content! I hadn't thought about the acessibility/findability issues, though I suppose they can be mitigated with CSS and/or JS. As for the other concerns, it seems to me (from a first read and without having mulled over this, mind you!) that they are the same as if the "expand" control was instead a link to a separate page. If so, [19:28:55] the issues are not specific to the show/hide dynamic; they're still worth considering, of course, but in the context of content design (i.e. whether we want to make a lot of information visible at once, or allow people to navigate/consume it through more digestible chunks.) (re @quidditywiki: @waldyrious Re: Collapsing, I'd note that it does already limit the default view to 5 e [19:28:56] ntries, and paginates any more than that....) [19:36:27] Interesting, it seems like Chromium-based browsers allow Ctrl+F'ing content within collapsed `

`: https://www.scottohara.me/blog/2022/09/12/details-summary.html (Firefox doesn't but I hope it's a matter of time.) [19:56:27] It's interesting that you list the tests as more collapsible than the implementations. I would have thought otherwise: the tests show you what the function does by example, if named well, whereas the implementations are more interesting to folks who prefer a higher information density. [20:37:56] Yeah, that's a good point! Perhaps we should think of the tests more as examples of what the function does than as validation of the correct behavior of the implementations (they do both things, but maybe we want to prioritize the former rather than the latter in naming and UI design) [21:21:06] 9420