incubator-jspwiki-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Jaquith <andrew.r.jaqu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 2 last failing unit tests
Date Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:22:07 GMT
Agreed on the side-effect of (3).

As for burden on end-users, don't you think that the current scheme is
confusing? I do. In the sense that I can't explain it simply...

Can you provide some examples where a
strip-the-whitespace-and-do-a-case-insensitive-comparison strategy
would not work, in Finnish? I'd like to understand this, seriously.

FYI, I took a look at JSPWiki.org to see what the scale of the problem
might be. The site has about 4850 pages. I yanked down all of the page
names and compared them. I detected exactly ONE name clash: "Text
formatting rulesKorean" and "TextformattingrulesKorean" appear to be
different pages. That is a 0.02% collision rate -- and easily handled
by a rename-on-import or special-page redirection strategy.

Andrew

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Janne Jalkanen <janne.jalkanen@iki.fi> wrote:
>> (1) Pages with spaces in their names are normalized so that any
>> consecutive whitespace is changed to one space character. Cases would
>> be preserved on storage.
>
> Good.
>
>> (2) Comparisons would be done by stripping out all whitespace and
>> doing a case-insensitive comparisons
>
> Not a good idea for Finnish language as it will create name clashes for
> things which are not actually relevant.  Strong -1, as it'll
> potentially make JSPWiki unusable for myself.  (This is probably true
> also for many other languages which depend a lot on word composition.)
>
> (Case-insensitive comparisons are fine. Stripping out whitespace
> before doing comparisons = bad.)
>
>> (3) When the page repository is migrated, on import, "clashing" links
>> would be modified so that they do not conflict. So if two pages called
>> "A test" and "atest" existed, the second one would be renamed to
>> "atest_2" (as would all its references).
>
> I have some experience in a case where we did this. The amount of
> confusion was pretty bad afterwards.  This should be avoided.
>
> I believe there are two things we shouldn't change for 3.0:
> * permalinks
> * Existing wiki pages
>
> Especially in large wikis changing the wiki page format will mean a
> lot of work for the users.  And we really don't want to add to the
> burden of the users.
>
> Note that your (3) means that some permalinks might be broken.
>
> /Janne
>

Mime
View raw message