Difference between revisions of "User talk:UpgradeBot"
m (new thread) |
m (add info) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==DocType File== | ==DocType File== | ||
'''This is not what is needed.''' DocType currently defines the ''contents'' of a page. That is its purpose' it is not to indicate which namespace it resides in; the prefix document does that. At present, all ''content'' defined by 'DocType' are indeed in the 'Document' namespace. The problem is that the ''contents'' of many files are documents too and need to have the same 'DocType'range as those in the 'Document' namespace. From the MW system perspective, such files (mainly pdf's but a few .doc and .odt too) are in the '/Images' directory of the MW directory tree because that's where MW puts all uploaded files - that has always struck me as anomalous but that's the way it is. The page prefix 'File:' is just an alias for 'Image:' so far as the software is concerned and it indicates the item is to be put in the '/Images' directory . From the outset of the project I have consistently allocated image uploads to [[:category:Image]] and 'Document' type files to [[:Category:Doc]] for precisely this reason; expecting that one day such a division would be useful. Maybe it will be useful now. --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 07:23, 10 December 2013 (GMT) | '''This is not what is needed.''' DocType currently defines the ''contents'' of a page. That is its purpose' it is not to indicate which namespace it resides in; the prefix document does that. At present, all ''content'' defined by 'DocType' are indeed in the 'Document' namespace. The problem is that the ''contents'' of many files are documents too and need to have the same 'DocType'range as those in the 'Document' namespace. From the MW system perspective, such files (mainly pdf's but a few .doc and .odt too) are in the '/Images' directory of the MW directory tree because that's where MW puts all uploaded files - that has always struck me as anomalous but that's the way it is. The page prefix 'File:' is just an alias for 'Image:' so far as the software is concerned and it indicates the item is to be put in the '/Images' directory . From the outset of the project I have consistently allocated image uploads to [[:category:Image]] and 'Document' type files to [[:Category:Doc]] for precisely this reason; expecting that one day such a division would be useful. Maybe it will be useful now. --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 07:23, 10 December 2013 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :For the purpose of Upgrading and/or incorporating the existing 'FileProv' metadata into 'DocProv', it would probably be best to add a new category to the existing 'FileProv' template (say [[:Category:Document Files]], or similar). If we do incorporate into 'DocProv' (and that's Robin's call), then the new category can then also be used to set the default form for Document Files to [[Form:Document]] too. --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 10:29, 10 December 2013 (GMT) | ||
Revision as of 10:29, 10 December 2013
DocType File
This is not what is needed. DocType currently defines the contents of a page. That is its purpose' it is not to indicate which namespace it resides in; the prefix document does that. At present, all content defined by 'DocType' are indeed in the 'Document' namespace. The problem is that the contents of many files are documents too and need to have the same 'DocType'range as those in the 'Document' namespace. From the MW system perspective, such files (mainly pdf's but a few .doc and .odt too) are in the '/Images' directory of the MW directory tree because that's where MW puts all uploaded files - that has always struck me as anomalous but that's the way it is. The page prefix 'File:' is just an alias for 'Image:' so far as the software is concerned and it indicates the item is to be put in the '/Images' directory . From the outset of the project I have consistently allocated image uploads to category:Image and 'Document' type files to Category:Doc for precisely this reason; expecting that one day such a division would be useful. Maybe it will be useful now. --Peter P (talk) 07:23, 10 December 2013 (GMT)
- For the purpose of Upgrading and/or incorporating the existing 'FileProv' metadata into 'DocProv', it would probably be best to add a new category to the existing 'FileProv' template (say Category:Document Files, or similar). If we do incorporate into 'DocProv' (and that's Robin's call), then the new category can then also be used to set the default form for Document Files to Form:Document too. --Peter P (talk) 10:29, 10 December 2013 (GMT)
