Talk:Editors

Serge, the illustration is perfect :-) Piotr 13:05, 13 December 2009 (EST)

Monitoring this page

We should monitor this page more often, to make sure to keep it reasonably neutral and informative rather than providing a platform for advertising.

Unfortunately, the beginner-friendliness scale feels extremely subjective, and lacks guidelines for any value beyond 1... Maybe it could be replaced by two or three values sufficiently broad to be believable.

Piotr 12:44, 20 February 2015 (CET)

Regarding the monitoring of the page, it is possible to set a watch on it to get an email with every change. I did this a while back. Regarding the beginner-friendliness column, it should be completely removed in my opinion because it is imprecise to the point of uselessness. --Louis-Dominique Dubeau 14:16, 20 February 2015 (CET)

Thanks, Louis-Dominique -- I am watching this page, but wanted to encourage others to do so too. Many edits here have escaped my attention. I tend to agree with your opinion about that column. Let us keep the issue open to discussion for some time, please. Piotr 14:25, 20 February 2015 (CET)

"work in progress" and disfunctional editors

Maybe we should be more explicit on this page that this is supposed to help people in choosing a working editor?
Asking sincerely, because I'm not sure -- maybe warning someone that editor X is outdated and editor Y is in progress is altogether relevant information?
OTOH, I can imagine arguing the opposite.
Thanks in advance, Piotr 15:36, 3 July 2015 (CEST)

Good point. I see 3 categories:

* editors that are usable now,

* editors that are not yet deemed usable but are progressing towards being usable,

* editors that have been abandoned in an unusable state. (This could be that they never reached a usable state or that, having been abandoned, it has become impossible or very arduous to use them.)

I could see cleaning the page so that it contains only the first 2 categories and have the 3rd category of editors be moved to another page to which this page would link. I am suggesting having the "work in progress" editors be on the same page as those that are already usable because in my experience (asking questions on TEI-L and having to implement systems that use such editors), people who are looking for a working editor are also interested in knowing what is up and coming. And I am suggesting moving the 3rd category to their own page because some in the community like to know what happened to them. Maybe they've used editor X in the past and would like to use it again but they lost their reference to it. So they come back here. If the editor is just gone from the wiki, they've learned nothing. If it is in a table of editors that are no longer usable that they can reach from this page, then they've learned that they can't count on it anymore. (I've had something of an experience like this before with some editors that I used briefly a long time ago.) And then there are those in the community who are tasked with implementing solutions and may just want to take over the development of a project that was abandoned rather than start from scratch. --Louis-Dominique Dubeau 16:18, 3 July 2015 (CEST)