These tags are 10 years old. Current documentation generators don't
need them.
Tagging something explicitely as being a @method can be useful in
an interface where the elements are initialized with e.g. `= null;`
instead of having an implementation. But we have implementations
here. Sure these are methods. No need to say that in the
documentation.
Also removing a comment that's obviously a copy-paste mistake from
what was the ve.ui.MWMediaSearchWidget back then. See Ib244ff6 and
before.
Change-Id: I7df6c789d10fd89e7fe97d56c942fd22c56d8458
This reverts commit 0566a495f3.
Reason for revert: Merged too soon, while discussion of the whole
approach is still ongoing.
Change-Id: I2d3d6455cd4ea12067e2020f6b41cfbb4672bbb5
It's fine to copy attributes directly from the reference node rather
than go through the specialized model object.
Bug: T336417
Change-Id: Idaca192137dc762ddced2ee8446a7d838f97e317
Begin a QUnit test module for the reference model. Tests demonstrate
that a new ref and a normal ref reuse from the full document both
behave as expected.
Bug: T336417
Change-Id: I1337806d41b50329ba971c8e68e1a62b52cc9a52
Intentionally no other change is made (yet). This is for a later,
separate patch.
Intentionally not touching the huge list of per-language
ext.cite.style.*.css files for the moment. Again, I would prefer to
do this in a separate patch.
Change-Id: I4e392c7bd1c69849a6c7946676a64c749ddbcd60
The current tracking is wrong for several reasons. Mainly because
of a race condition if the Popups extension fininshed loading
before the Cite tracking script is executed. But further more
wgPopupsReferencePreviews was not a good choice to see if the user
sees previews or not.
The logging now uses the monoschema and only checks for enabled
previews when the click events are fired. The chances that Popups
finished initilizing then are much higher then. We still can see
if the init is not finished and the variable not set though.
Also we won't track the overall pageviews in here but use the
generic pageview_hourly from the data lake instead.
Bug: T353798
Depends-On: I1c434f0098ae23bd62256686a658e3d5ef7f70b9
Change-Id: I7a9524274efb58286f520c6148d5463bb0a78dbf
Same as Icfa8215 where we removed the …_suffix messages.
This patch is not blocked on anything according to CodeSearch:
https://codesearch.wmcloud.org/search/?q=cite_references%3F_link_prefix
According to GlobalSearch there are 2 usages we need to talk about:
https://global-search.toolforge.org/?q=.®ex=1&namespaces=8&title=Cite.references%3F.link.prefix.*
zh.wiktionary replaces "cite_ref-" with "_ref-", and "cite_note-"
with "_note-", i.e. they did nothing but remove the word "cite". This
happened in 2006, with no explanation.
ka.wikibooks and ka.wikiquote replace "cite_note-" with "_შენიშვნა-",
which translates back to "_note-". One user did this in 2007,
16 seconds apart.
It appears like both are attempts to localize what can be localized,
no matter if it's really necessary or not.
https://zh.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Shibo77?offset=20060510https://ka.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Trulala?offset=20070219
Note how one user experimented with an "a" in some of the edits to
see what effect the change might have, to imediatelly revert it.
The modifications don't really have an effect on anything, except on
the anchors in the resulting <a href="#_ref-5"> and <sup id="_ref-5">
HTML. It might also be briefly visible in the browser's address bar
when such a link is clicked. We can only assume the two users did this
to make the URL appear shorter (?). A discussion apparently never
happened. Bot users are inactive.
Both pieces of HTML are generated in the Cite code. Removing the
messages will change all places the same time. All links will
continue to work. The only possible effect is that hard-coded
weblinks to an individual reference will link to the top of the
article instead. But:
a) This is extremely unlikely to happen. There is no reason to link
to a reference from outside of the article.
b) Such links are not guaranteed to work anyway as they can break
for a multitude of other reasons, e.g. the <ref> being renamed,
removed, or replaced.
c) Even if such a link breaks, it still links to the correct article.
There is also no on-wiki code on zh.wiktionary that would do anything
with the shortened prefix:
https://zh.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%2F_%28ref%7Cnote%29-%2F&title=Special%3A%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns2=1&ns4=1&ns8=1&ns10=1&ns12=1&ns828=1&ns2300=1
I argue this is safe to remove, even without contacting the mentioned
communities first.
Bug: T321217
Change-Id: I160a119710dc35679dbdc2f39ddf453dbd5a5dfa
WikiEditor also uses 'html' instead of 'text' on headings. At the
moment both keys have the same behavior, but the original intended idea
is to have 'html' as already valid HTML (like on .parse()) and 'text'
on plain text which has to be escaped.
Change-Id: I1b4035a86ed56bfeb12d33b463d67099f7ae40e3
