Topic on Talk:Structured Discussions

The Archiving setup is either bad or very burdensome. There is no Archiving; instead, I have to click "Browse topics" and look for older discussions, or I have to scroll down to the bottom of the page to see more older discussions.

I don't like switching between "Source editing" and "Visual editing" to preview my messages before posting. It's annoying, and I have to switch back and forth every time to see what I've written. There should be a "Show preview" button. If not, what are other ways to preview messages?

The archiving system is indeed perfectible. There are some ideas around that, like have a better search system and/or tag/status to handle discussions (T90471).

Concerning the switch, that's also perfectible (tracked on T183382). Have you tried to edit in visual mode? For most cases I've seen on many discussions, the visual mode is sufficient.

Besides filtering by date, how would filtering the messages improve the archiving system? Even filtering is not the same as searching by a page or another, which makes searches more flexible.

I've done visual editing by using Structured Discussions. However, this is nothing compared to wikitext editing. Indeed, the visual editor mode of Structure Discussions doesn't provide underlining or strikethrough at the moment. Nevertheless, I see that VisualEditor in en.WP provides both underlining and strikethrough.

I see that copying and pasting an internal link from a MediaWiki can result from [[MediaWiki]]. Oh wait... VisualEditor doesn't provide <code><nowiki></nowiki><code> or any HTML coding, like < and >. Wait... source should provide proper HTML coding, shouldn't it?

By the way, I can indent by pressing the space bar several times (or hold it for less than a second).

You can have tagging that would handle discussions status: ongoing, archived, vote open...

Concerning editing, you can have quite all you describe when you use visual mode to edit, like on the visual editor. That's a new learning path to get, but if you are curious of it, you may like it. After years of wikitext editing, I've now I've switched for good to visual editing for all my contributions when it is possible, both as staff or as a volunteer editor.

All what I'll describe below is mostly based on shortcuts, because the toolbar is kept short (some users have asked for an extended one). You can access the list of all shortcuts by pressing CTRL+/ or CTRL+SHIFT+/ when you edit, or check the keyboard shortcuts page (CTRL is CMD if you have a Mac.). You will have access to underlining or strikethrough so as code.

To have access to nowiki, here is a trick:

1. type "{", "SPACE", "{", which wil give you { {.
2. clear the space between the brackets : {{
3. Finish typing your example: {{template}}
4. You can have it shown as code: {{template}}

You can also call the template interface by typing two curly brackets like in code and then discard the search window (Escape key). Brackets will be nowiki-fied.

Storage of Structured discussions aren't using wikitext yet. HTML shortcuts will not work: you can't add <bold> or something else in it.

You can't indent by pressing space: it will be shown as working on visual editing mode, but will not be kept when you'll post the reply. Instead, you can create a blockquote by typing : at the beginning of a paragraph.

Hope this helps! :)

I still don't see a shortcut to write out <nowiki></nowiki>

Also, does anyone else know and/or have they been told about the Ctrl+/?

Automated signature time and date is already done, but to see when a comment was originally made, I have to see a history log. This isn't like (~~~~) or (~~~~~), which makes dates more visible and usually helpful.

The shortcuts from Ctrl+/ don't provide tabling a chart:

Example

Example 2

Example 3

They also don't provide list formatting:

• Example
• Example 2
• Example 3

1. Example
   1. Example 2
2. Example 3

Another question: why switching from wikitexting to visual editing? How is visual editing more preferable than wiki editing? By the way, Microsoft Office has always provided visual editing but not some sort of coding.

I'm not sure to understand your first point. I can type <nowiki>. Or I can create nowiki-fied contents by using the process I gave you.

I tell people about ctrl+/ time to time, and there is the documentation about that. This said, I totally agree on the fact that it lacks a item in the menu and, good news, it is ready to be added.

Concerning time, you can see the the time for the last edit by hovering the relative time. To know the history, you indeed need to check the history page.

Ctrl+/ provides the shortcut to insert a table (bottom right on the panel). Then you have all tools to work on that table (insert rows, delete columns...). I also see shortcuts to increase and decrease indentation on lists (center of the central column) but you're right concerning list options that are missing.

Most cases you've surfacing are not in the toolbar, because on most discussions, having more tools is not needed. That was the design preset, but based on the feedback received (including yours), it is likely to be reconsidered. The new question is to know when it will be done.

Concerning VE versus wikitext, I'm not sure to understand your question. You want to know why VE is default? OR you want to know why VE is the previewing system? I also don't understand your example with Office. Sorry. :/

For the first point, I should have said a "keyboard shortcut" for <nowiki>.

The "Insert" column contains only the keyboard shortcut to insert a reference, like an external source. I don't see anything else under the column. I don't see the keyboard shortcut to add a table.

Regarding VE vs wikitext, I'll elaborate: "Why did you prefer VE over wikitext? How was wikitext to you?" I didn't think about a second question before, like "Why is VE default?", but I can ask that right away.

Sorry also for being less clear on the Microsoft Office example. I'll elaborate by using one example: At Microsoft Office, I visually format a word by either bolding (i.e. either the "B" button or Ctrl+B) and/or italicizing ("I" button or Ctrl+I) and/or underlining it ("U" button or Ctrl+U). At wiki's VE, same thing, but I have to publish the changes.

It is strange that you don't have more items on the help fly-out. Which browser and OS do you use? Would you share with me a screenshot of what you see? Tip: most wikitext "starting" elements are shortcuts, like [[ to insert a link, {{ for a template or {| for a table.

VE is default because it is a rich text editor. Most conversations, like the ones we have, don't require much wikitext: you just need to type a message and see if it is well formatted, right? Structured discussions are used on several wikis as a safe place for newcomers: while using visual mode, they can start and participate to discussions without being obliged to know the discussions conventions. People who want to have wikitext by default can do so on their preferences (preferences that should be more visible, I admit).

I'm still not sure to get that Office example. When I use VE to write messages and I bold or italic some elements (using buttons or shortcuts), I see the results immediately. I'm under visual input mode, maybe you aren't? There is two systems on Structured discussions: visual editing and the 2017 wikitext editor. Maybe you are using that wikitext editor, that uses VE design? If so, you have to preview by switching to VE. Is it the case?

I realize Opera 52, Firefox 59, and Internet Explorer 11 at Windows 7 don't show as many shortcuts as Chrome 65.

• 
  IE11
• 
  Firefox 59
• 
  Chrome 65

Oh... I have to use wikitext to format an image gallery.

Well, phab:T184701 and phab:T183382 already address the third point we're discussing.

Thank you for the screenshots. I think we don't have the same editor in mind when we speak: your feedback is based on wikitext editor, mine is on VE. :)

Using Firefox and Chromium last versions on Ubuntu, I have all those shortcuts and they work when I use VE mode. However, they are absent in the wikitext editor because that editor don't have (yet?) a visual assistance to insert a table or add hieroglyphs. However, have more options to add things, like a pre-formatted syntax for tables, would be welcome. This is done with the extended toolbar you'll find in the 2017 editor (Beta feature on most wikis) and have it on Structured discussions is covered by T93243. (I've edited it to get more features)

Have you tried to type <gallery> in visual mode? It opens an assistant with a search bar and formatting options for captions.

Ad thank you for that conversion. I really appreciate it.