Last modified: 2014-03-10 18:32:57 UTC
"Preformatted" is HTML jargon which most of VisualEditor's target users will not understand, and it actually produces an effect (text with less formatting) which is unexpected if you don't know what it means beforehand. It should either be given a plain-language name so that people will expect the behavior, or removed. I actually don't understand why this style effect is in the header-level pull-down when it is not a header-level. My preference is to remove it, since it is uncommon and mostly adding noise, but it should be renamed if kept.
I agree. It's strange that it's currently in the header menu. A separate menu for <blockquote> and <pre> may make sense.
This isn't a "header pull-down menu", it's a text style menu. Also, having yet another control in the toolbar (for blockquote, pre and whatever else) doesn't feel great. :-(
My confusion came from the fact that the user guide refers to it as the "Headings pull-down menu" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User_guide#Getting_started:_the_VisualEditor_toolbar), and every other option in the menu is a heading level (or no level), not a style. If there is somewhere else where styles like pre are going to go, or you intend to add other styles to this same menu, that's fine with me, but my original point about it being jargon still stands. (Though if you add more style options to the same menu, I think that is even more reason to remove pre as noise.)
Now that we have the "more" menu I don't think the button issue exists (to the same degree at least) as it did. As the "preformatted" name I agree it doesn't make sense, as this isn't really what it does. I was going to suggest "monospaced" but it's more than that - it's monospaced and indented with a shaded background. However, <code> also produces monospace and a shaded background but that is different.
Should this bug report continue to be assigned? I think a mock would help here.
(In reply to MZMcBride from comment #5) > Should this bug report continue to be assigned? > > I think a mock would help here. A mock of what? Moving some (but not all) paragraph-level formats somewhere else seems like a really bad design. We'd be talking about pre-formatted, blockquote, and maybe other like poem and so-on being in one menu, and other tools that operate in the exact same way (e.g. don't apply to a selection). I'm inclined to WONTFIX at this point…
(In reply to James Forrester from comment #6) > (In reply to MZMcBride from comment #5) > > I'm inclined to WONTFIX at this point… I was under the impression that VisualEditor was about removing jargon and unneeded advanced features that clutter the user experience. All three of the other commenters here agreed that "Preformatted" is jargon that should at least be renamed using plain language. And it's not really even clear why we expect "preformatted" to be a common enough formatting choice among VisualEditor users that it even merits the inclusion in that menu. Your comment on WONTFIXing the report doesn't address the actual problem being raised.
Eh, this is a bad wontfix. My dictionary doesn't contain "preformatted"; we can probably come up with a better term. Regarding the user interface, it's a bit confusing why there's a text formatting menu (paragraph text and headings) next to another text formatting menu (bold, underline, computer code, etc.). It might make sense to move the artist currently known as preformatted to the bottom of the latter menu as it's not very commonly needed (about as commonly needed as needing to write "computer code" using VisualEditor, surely).
(In reply to Dominic from comment #7) > (In reply to James Forrester from comment #6) > > (In reply to MZMcBride from comment #5) > > > > I'm inclined to WONTFIX at this point… > > I was under the impression that VisualEditor was about removing jargon Sort-of. Actually, it's about making it easy to edit content. > and unneeded advanced features that clutter the user experience. No. In meeting the "making it easy to edit content" objective, we can't rope off some content that is considered "too difficult" to explain nicely. > All three of the other commenters here agreed that "Preformatted" is jargon > that should at least be renamed using plain language. Sure, but no-one has actually suggested something they think is better yet (Chris suggested "monospace", but said he didn't like it, and I somewhat agree). Until such time as someone suggests a better term, this is unfixable. > And it's not really even clear why we expect "preformatted" to be a common > enough formatting choice among VisualEditor users that it even merits the > inclusion in that menu. That's a more interesting question, yes, as I said in comment 6. But that's not what other people's comments on this bug have been about. > Your comment on WONTFIXing the report doesn't address the actual problem > being raised. Pick one. Either this bug is about removing "preformatted" as an option, in which case WONTFIX stands, or it's about something else ("come up with a different name"? "have a secondary system for less-common formats"? something else?) and make it about that? (In reply to MZMcBride from comment #8) > Eh, this is a bad wontfix. My dictionary doesn't contain "preformatted"; we > can probably come up with a better term. See above. > Regarding the user interface, it's a bit confusing why there's a text > formatting menu (paragraph text and headings) next to another text > formatting menu (bold, underline, computer code, etc.). It might make sense > to move the artist currently known as preformatted to the bottom of the > latter menu as it's not very commonly needed (about as commonly needed as > needing to write "computer code" using VisualEditor, surely). It's formatting vs. styling; one operates on paragraphs, the other on selections (which can be smaller than a paragraph). I agree that it's confusing (yay HTML and MediaWiki), but I think it would be more confusing to have things in the same menu that do radically different things without distinction.
Also, a dictionary cite for usage of "pre-formatted": http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/149454?rskey=n6kMKv&result=2&isAdvanced=false#eid51449481 (not that it gives a definition or synonym we could use).
