Talk:Terminology/mediawiki

I suggest to move the terms

• template
• checkbox, tickbox
• to check, select, tick, mark (a checkbox)
• to uncheck, deselect, unticked, unmark (a checkbox)

elsewhere. They are general computerese, not MediaWiki specific. --Purodha Blissenbach 19:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm I agree for all except template. It has specific meaning in mediawiki.

Yep, 'template' needs to be in both glossaries. As I understood this definition, it appeared relativly general to me.

I support above proposals.

I moved the general computer terms to a new page for a general computer terminology.

Can we have an additional column in the table, with column header "Extension"? The data would be the name of the extension or area of Mediawiki where the term is mainly used. Purodha originally suggested including info on context which in Mediawiki is usually the relevant extension. If we stick to using the title of the extension or other context label in this column then it becomes easily sortable by extension. This could then be used to invite the input of the extension developer. Any other extensions also using the term would have to go under notes. The title of the extension could be written as plain text (simplest) or as a link to the extension page at Mediawiki if preferred.

Do we want to include all extension terms in the same page or make different pages for them?

Hm. I suppose the advantages of having separate glossaries for each extension would be:

• It would be easier to create a separate wordlist for any future new extensions, rather than adding terms to an already long list of words.
• The lists of terms to translate will be shorter and therefore less daunting for translators to tackle.

If we are going to use the word dump to build the lists, how are we going to separate the words into different lists for each extension?

The dump on /mediawiki only contains words from core, if you are talking about that.

I see. If that's the size of the dump from core messages, how big is the one from the extensions going to be? Ah well.

Would not all glossary infos have to end up in a searchable database format in the end?

Of course.