Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals/2008

Books as a Unit
I would like some kind of meta-organizational ability for books. This means that we specify a list of pages for a book, in reading order on one page, or in a form or something. With the list in place, the software can, optionally, do stuff:
 * 1) Create an automatic table of contents. Consider a page like Special:Tableofcontents/Book, which we could also transclude into another page if we wanted to.
 * 2) Create an automatic print version. Something like Special:Printversion/Book. this should, of course, integrate with the upcoming click-to-print extension that people have been talking about
 * 3) Create automatic forward/back links on subpages, possibly at top and bottom of pages

We could also do things like
 * 1) "delete all", button to delete an entire book at once, not page-by-page.
 * 2) "move all", rename all pages in the book at once, if the name of the book changes.
 * 3) "protect all", to protect or unprotect an entire book, if necessary.

--Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 19:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You forgot "watchlist all" -- this should include watching pages added to the book, and un-watching pages which are removed from the book. – Mike.lifeguard  &#124; talk 19:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, and similarly, Special:RecentchangesBook (to see all the recent changes in a particular book without adding it to your watchlist). --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 19:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The key difference between recent changes (linked) and watchlist is that watchlist tracks the page even when it is removed from a book; recent changes (linked) only tracks changes to pages still linked (as I would imagine a recent changes by book would work). I think that in general, a recent changes that tracked all sub-pages of a book would be more useful, but note the difference. (As a side note - Atom feeds are really good for tracking changes to books that have each page in a category - better would be Atom feeds of RecentchangesBook) Webaware talk 02:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Features for books
Some additional features that I would like to see (some of which are currently in the works): --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 19:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) a magic word (or template, or whatever)
 * 2) Special:RandomBook (go to a random book, not just any random page)
 * 3) Special:SearchBook (search inside one particular book only)

Some more thoughts: --Webaware talk 03:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) per-book CSS - allows for book-specific styling
 * 2) per-book JavaScript - allows for book-specific gadgets (although I don't see it as anywhere near as useful as the CSS - and it has the potential to create more work for admins with JS skills)
 * 3) navigation tools - say, top-level pages available to a JS script for generating inter-chapter navigation, next level pages for intra-chapter navigation


 * "Search Book" should probably be an option on Special:Search, not a separate special page. I don't know about per-book js (though css is good) -- what use do we forsee for that? &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 01:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

How to represent books in the database
MediaWiki was designed for Wikipedia initially, so it's hardly a surprise that these features are not in the core software. We're now faced with various feature requests that need to know what pages are grouped together so we can perform actions on the group of pages. It's been suggested that a property parent_book is created and indexed so we know what book a page belongs to. Pages without that property are the book "main pages" and every other mainspace page would have it identify what book it belongs to. When performing a "book action" that property would be used to determine what pages are affected. This property would be automatically determined initially, but should perhaps be editable through a special page, like WK mentions above. Assigning a page as belonging to some book would set the parent_book field.

There is a question of whether it's worth creating these database structures... Simetrical has said that this is redundant since the page title already tells us what book a page belongs to. Unfortunately, that's only true when pages are correctly named. As well, performing some test on the page title each time you need to know whether it's a module or a book seems highly inefficient. Simetrical's suggestion is to instead create a new namespace for the book contents, and retain the main namespace as only a way to keep track of the books themselves. I don't understand how that helps the software know what book some module belongs to, but it's very likely I'm not understanding this in full. I look forward to any knowledgable discussion of how best to implement the book/module distinction within the database. – Mike.lifeguard  &#124; talk 19:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems to be there are only two approaches that have been thought of so far:
 * require all books to follow specific rules in order to be considered a book which allows automation for any that follows the rules and
 * use a system where anything could be a book, but which would require some manual identification on the part of users.


 * A third approach might be to allow both automatic and manual identification. The FlaggedRevision extension could, if more generalized maybe, be thought of as a tagging system. In that setup pages could be auto-tagged as a book if they follow the rules set out for there identification, while also allowing people to manually tag pages as books too. This would provide the best of both approaches, with most books being automatically tagged, and the few that don't follow it still being able to be identified as books as needed. --dark lama  15:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the namespace idea was to put all the submodules in a separate namespace and leave the main module of each book in the main namespace. This might make it easier counting the number of books, by tagging each books mainpage and counting, or tagging the other pages such as Main Page and then counting whats left. But if the pages don't follow the naming policy then this still requires manually tagging the pages of the book to group them with the book.


 * I like darklama's idea and the parent_book property idea, because it would get most of the books done automatically. I would prefer using a template instead of a special page to change the parent_book property, so that I could put templates on pages to override the softwares parent_book property for pages created as main modules in the main namespace which are actually pages of books. Doing it automatically and then checking over it manually would be like painting the background and then painting the foreground (sort of), and that is usually the easiest way to do it. rawrawrer (talk) 10:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I have submitted 15071 for a custom database schema for Wikibooks. This bug should block most other feature requests (though most are not in bugzilla as of yet). Please help out by putting them in the system, and marking the depends on and blocks fields appropriately. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 18:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Requirements for PDFs
There has been some talk today about automatic PDF generator programs. What I would like to do is try to flesh out, in one central place, all the necessary requirements for a PDF generator tool that we can use here at Wikibooks to create PDFs from our books. Here are some requirements that I am thinking of: Given these requirements, I think that the be best way to create a PDF is the way that I have been doing it for a while: Create a Print version for the book, and then convert the raw HTML of the print version to PDF. When creating a print version, authors will include material in the proper order, will typically include a link to the GFDL, etc. Also, in the print version, all templates will display like normal. One tool that I've been using personally (and I don't know how it compares to any other alternatives) is PrimoPDF. It's free, but it's not open source that I'm aware of. If there is a similar open-source alternative, I would love to hear about it. PrimoPDF installs like a printer, and you can "print" to it from any program. Instead of going to a physical printer, the output is a PDF file that looks exactly how it does in your browser's "print preview" screen.
 * 1) PDFs should contain the full text of the GFDL. Any PDF generator should check for this, and add it if it wouldn't be included otherwise. Notice that some books do include the GFDL in their TOC, and we don't want it to be included twice.
 * 2) Attribution. We don't currently have an automated tool for doing this at all (although I had heard that one such tool was being worked on). The GFDL requires that we list authors on the cover page of the book, which means we need a way to identify authors.
 * 3) Ability to pick and choose which pages get included into the PDF. Some automated tools will try to transclude nonsensical pages into the PDF, such as "Book/Print version". Some automated tools may also include pages out of order, especially if the TOC is arranged in a table. You should also be able to remove certain pages from the PDF, such as "/Print Version", "/For Contributors", "/Book Policy", "/LMOS", etc.
 * 4) PDFs should show all templates that aren't classed as "metadata" or "noprint". I've seen too many PDFs generated that leave big blank spaces where a should be, or whatever.

Anyway, this would be a good time for us all to sit down and think about PDFs, how we make them, and how we can make them better. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 21:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I used LEd and LaTeX for First Aid. It required tons of manual editing, so unless you're willing to put in some effort, I would recommend using an automatic PDF creator. There is one on the toolserver, and several extensions we may want to push: mw:Extension:Pdf Book, mw:Extension:Pdf Export, mw:Extension:Pdf Export Dompdf. There is also one on WikiEducator.org that may warrant a look. Also, Brion has some notes on his blog. – Mike.lifeguard  &#124; talk 23:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I know the WMF had said something about making a PDF creation extension part of the default software install. In fact, the extension at Wikieducator is precisely the extension that the WMF has said it is going to use for all it's projects. I am not yet certain whether the extension will be automatically GFDL compliant (will it include a list of authors, will it include a copy of the GFDL by default, etc). Maybe we should file a bugzilla report asking for the extension to get installed here since we really need something like it and we're small enough to test it without the feature having to go live on Wikipedia. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 14:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Separate "recent changes" feed for each book
In general, books on wikibooks stay in "work in progress" status for a long time. In such a state, the books are neither complete nor they are uninteresting to neglect all together. New content additions and enhancements are often made to such books. Some books are never really finished even after being voted featured. I think there should be a RSS/Atom feed per book to track the recent changes to it. Currently, I believe, the recent changes feed is a cocktail of the changes happening all over the place on wikibooks. Please correct me if I'm wrong. It is annoying at best and of least use for those who are tracking development of a small set of nice books. Moreover, such a feed can give an approximate idea of the count of interested readers through independent services like FeedBurner. What do you think?

Sutambe (talk) 23:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You can use Special:RecentChangesLinked to approximate this. – Mike.lifeguard  &#124; talk 00:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but it is not a RSS feed. I'm looking for a push-based technique (RSS) rather than a pull-based technique (query/search). Thanks for pointing to the search interface anyways! Sutambe (talk) 16:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe Mike is referring to the RSS feed associated with RecentChangesLinked. For instance Related Changes For More C++ Idioms --dark lama  00:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah!! That looks more like it! Thanks folks! Sutambe (talk) 15:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I was thinking more on this. The default link tag that I see in the wikibook pages points to the general "all inclusive" feed. How about changing the default link tag in the generated page to something like <font color="midnightblue">dark lama  has shown. I mean, a page specific link tag. It will allows browsers to detect the page specific feed.  Sutambe (talk) 15:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Why not use a versioning scheme to identify significant updates when each book is packaged as a pdf etc... then it would be easy to keep up to date using existing tools like apt-get or other package managers. I introduced this idea on Ubuntu's brainstorm site with a very positive response especially amongst educators.
 * Something like that is about to be implemented: mw:Extension:FlaggedRevs. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 09:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Separate Upload forms for different users
I propose that Wikibooks use a different upload form based on what users wish to upload, a bit like how Wikimedia Commons handles uploads. So for instance we can have a form for works created by the uploader which recommends uploading to Commons instead and includes only licenses for original works, or a form for fair use which includes Wikibooks requirements for fair use and recommends searching Commons before uploading.

In order to be able to use a different license drop down menu for each form a request has to be made to bugzilla asking for the developers to add:

$wgForceUIMsgAsContentMsg[] = 'licenses';

So if people like this idea, a show of support is needed before making this request. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  16:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If I understand you correctly, and there is always the chance that I am thinking of the wrong thing, I like this idea. A better and more informational upload mechanism will help to answer a lot of questions that users have, and will help to correct a lot of errors that new uploaders produce. I this. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Yes, I've long advocated stealing borrowing the new javascript for the upload form that Commons is developing. While we don't need multilingual support, we do want a streamlined process that will help new users in the direction of making good uploads (complete info, uploaded to the right place etc...) To do that we'll need this change. – <font color="Indigo">Mike.lifeguard  &#124; <font color="Indigo">talk 17:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The only thing I worry about (and admittedly it's a small worry) is that if we make the upload process too comfortable here, it might discourage people from uploading commons. I think it's generally preferable for many reasons that users upload images over there instead of here. Anything that we steal borrow should be modified to show emphasis on uploading to commons. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well that is the idea to emphasis uploading to Commons for works which can be freely used and to emphasis searching Commons before uploading fair use images to Wikibooks. Just want to make it easier for uploaders to understand that and make it easier for them if they choose not to for whatever reason (such as not having an account and not interested). --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  18:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy enough having the freely-licensed options simply point folks to Commons and fair use options point here. Commons is obviously much better equipped for handling media uploads - there is no reason anything except fair use should be uploaded here rather than there, and every reason for the opposite. Again, depending on how hawkish we want to be on fair use, it may be worth allowing admin uploads only - free media to Commons, and you may ask an admin to upload fair use media for you. Either way, we should be encouraging free media to be uploaded to Commons. – <font color="Indigo">Mike.lifeguard  &#124; <font color="Indigo">talk 00:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Navigation Popups Gadget
User:Ramac requested that we install the Navigation Popups Gadget here, it's a javascript gadget for use with Special:Gadgets. See. I think WV might have this gadget as well, so we might want to look at their files to see how to install it. I dont have time to do this myself today, but if anybody else can that would be awesome. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This gadget basically provides a preview of a page when you roll over a link. I think Wikibooks would benefit more from a gadget to preview a book when you roll over a book link. For instance using good book templates to show a summery of what a book is about. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  18:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it also provides links and other information about the page, whether book or module (it is nice for patrolling).
 * Installing is very simple. In the gadget script you have just to put this:


 * or importing this from Wikiversity (the page takes a few minutes to open).
 * Next, individual configurations has to be made on personal monobook script. --Ramac (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, please do not have the gadget load it from elsewhere, I will bring the source over later today, and you'll be using it by tomorrow. – <font color="Indigo">Mike.lifeguard  &#124; <font color="Indigo">talk 19:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * He didn't say anything about it here, but Mike installed the gadget. It's now available for use here. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 00:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Editing with Special Symbols
When editing a page in Wikipedia there are more special characters shown for immediate insertion than are provided in Wikibooks. i.e.

Symbols: ~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • ¶  # ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ∞   ‘ “ ’ ” «»   ¤ ₳ ฿ ₵ ¢ ₡ ₢ $ ₫ ₯ € ₠ ₣ ƒ ₴ ₭ ₤ ℳ ₥ ₦ № ₧ ₰ £ ៛ ₨ ₪ ৳ ₮ ₩ ¥   ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦  m² m³

Cyrillic: А а Б б В в Г г  Ґ ґ Ѓ ѓ Д д Ђ ђ   Е е Ё ё Є є Ж ж   З з Ѕ ѕ И и І і   Ї ї Й й Ј ј К к   Ќ ќ Л л Љ љ М м   Н н Њ њ О о П п   Р р С с Т т Ћ ћ   У у Ў ў Ф ф Х х   Ц ц Ч ч Џ џ Ш ш   Щ щ Ъ ъ Ы ы Ь ь   Э э Ю ю Я я

IPA: t̪ d̪ ʈ ɖ ɟ ɡ ɢ ʡ ʔ  ɸ ʃ ʒ ɕ ʑ ʂ ʐ ʝ ɣ ʁ ʕ ʜ ʢ ɦ   ɱ ɳ ɲ ŋ ɴ   ʋ ɹ ɻ ɰ   ʙ ʀ ɾ ɽ   ɫ ɬ ɮ ɺ ɭ ʎ ʟ   ɥ ʍ ɧ   ɓ ɗ ʄ ɠ ʛ   ʘ ǀ ǃ ǂ ǁ   ɨ ʉ ɯ   ɪ ʏ ʊ   ɘ ɵ ɤ   ə ɚ   ɛ ɜ ɝ ɞ ʌ ɔ   ɐ ɶ ɑ ɒ   ʰ ʷ ʲ ˠ ˤ ⁿ ˡ   ˈ ˌ ː ˑ ̪   •  { {IPA|} }

I am particularly interested in the IPA symbols which would be useful in writing foreign language lessons, although I suppose previous authors have been managing OK with the current set up. I would just like to start a discussion really, on whether there is sufficient demand to make some more symbols available in Wikibooks. Perhaps there could be an option in a user's editing preferences to show more special symbols, or to show fewer with a larger font size. Recent Runes (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I dont remember where to find it exactly, but I will mention that this request, should people agree on it, will be as simple to implement as copy+pasting some code from WP to here. I don't personally have a use for these symbols, but I see no particular reason why we couldn't have them if other people wanted them. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 18:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is ok, you could also add some templates or wiki formatting tools. It is the system message MediaWiki:Edittools (on wikipedia w:MediaWiki:Edittools). --Ramac (talk) 18:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I was wondering whether there are any drawbacks, perhaps only that you would have to scroll down a bit more to click on links right at the bottom of the page. Except the only things further down look as if they would only be used very infrequently. Provided the new symbols are below the old ones, I think there should not be any inconvenience to users of the present symbols. Recent Runes (talk) 19:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ I've gone ahead and copied stuff over from Commons. The solution used by Commons and some other wikis, avoids having to scroll down a lot. I think this has been asked for many times--<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  19:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Er, it doesn't look quite right to me at the moment. Recent Runes (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You may need to purge your cache to see the effects. It involves using some javascript to generate a menu just above the list of characters to switch between Standard, Symbols, etc. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  19:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, I call that a major improvement! But perhaps the text that hovers over the drop-down should say "select special character set" instead of "click on the wanted special character". Recent Runes Recent Runes (talk) 20:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I had the old one hidden with css: Any suggestions on how to do that with this system? – <font color="Indigo">Mike.lifeguard  &#124; <font color="Indigo">talk 01:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia now has a more compact symbol-insertion tool which only occupies one line on the screen by default, but it does not provide as many symbol sets as we have currently. I think it just splits the Standard symbol set into 2 sets Insert & Wiki Markup. Perhaps a hybrid between the Wikipedia tool and our present one could be made, with the benefits of both? Recent Runes (talk) 11:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Removal of empty books and orphaned pages
See: 68% of books have only a title page  RobinH (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't see this discussion, is it archived? --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

SSS (Some Stupid Suggestions)
There are many potential Wikibook authors who have already created courseware and it might be possible to attract some of them if they didn't have to rekey their work.

All the best

Jugandi (talk) 14::38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've split your suggestions up into the sections below, along with some comments on each. &mdash; <b style="color::#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17::49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Technical

 * 1) Create scripts allowing easy imports of other file formats doc. pdf. html etc. requiring minimum editing afterwards.
 * 2) Create a script for automating basic tables. (complex tables can be done later)
 * 3) Create a simple method of controlling page size.
 * 4) Create an automatic next link on pages
 * 5) Create textbook-like templates (for those of us who are computer illiterate)


 * I think automated conversion of OOo, html, and PDF should be do-able. Not sure whether we would consider doing coversion to/from proprietary formats like .doc though.
 * WYSIWYG is a long-term goal for us, but the technical hurdles are massive. So massive, we haven't begun and will not begin for the forseeable future, working on such a system. However, tables are a reasonably simple thing to do, and that should be requested from the developers.
 * I don't understand what you mean by "a simple method for controlling page size" -- isn't adding or removing content from the page the absolute simplest method?
 * Automatic navigation has been requested, but work on that has not begun as there is nobody interested in doing the coding for it. We can currently use templates to mimic this.
 * Textbook-like templates... would you expand on what you want here?
 * &mdash; <b style="color::#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17::49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * A simple table automator script could be doable. We could have some kind of interface for making basic tables that would write out the syntax automatically. The problem of course is finding a simplified interface (either a markup that we translate into wikitext or a GUI that does some of it). WYSIWYG is being worked on at the MediaWiki level and isn't something we're working on here. If you are looking for a tool to help with creating new books quickly, you might be interested in my Book Designer Javascript. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 02:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Content

 * 1) Make alliances with these companies to allow the free use of their material.
 * 2) Request funding form these companies
 * 3) Find some way to tap into the large numbers of now under utilized high tech workers
 * Alliances are great - go ahead an pursue them! I'd love if the Foundation would put some effort into this sort of thing, but I don't know how much (if any) interest there is in doing so at the Foundation level. I suspect they would view it as a task for the volunteers to do.
 * Funding should be handled through chapters or the Foundation.
 * Recruitment (and not just in the area you mention) is something I've been meaning to put some effort into studying for some time now. I simply don't have the spare time to look at it in-depth and come up with any robust solutions to maintain recruitment.
 * &mdash; <b style="color::#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17::49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Partnerships

 * 1) Make alliances with colleges which have online courseware on Moodle and similar open source systems to support easy import.
 * 2) Promote each others work (logos, links etc.)
 * This is probably an excellent idea. Again, volunteers interested in this should pursue it. Unfortunately, we're all limited by time and resources. This is yet another thing some help from the Foundation would be good for.
 * We don't do link exchanges, and we don't do advertising. We can't offer that sort of thing in return for services from other organizations, but we can do other kinds of outreach. Again, I think this is best handled through the chapters or the Foundation.
 * &mdash; <b style="color::#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17::49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Marketing

 * 1) Settle on a logo & an assortment of tag lines, and merchandise them online & at college book stores (coffee/beer mugs, sweat shirts, etc)
 * 2) Make some funny Wikibook videos and post them on YouTube.
 * Well, the logo selection process has stalled almost completely. I'm hoping we'll get it done this year. It is really utterly stagnant at this point, and we need someone to push it forward -- and fast. Perhaps some other admin would take that on? We do have a limited number of products on Cafepress. I wonder what Kul and Sue would have to say about expanding that part of our business strategy...?
 * Wikibooks videos is a great idea. I think promotional and educational videos are an excellent idea. Anyone who can do so is certainly welcome to. &mdash; <b style="color::#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17::49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Java enhancement by book in the recent changes...
You can currently use that nifty Java enhanced recent changes where it groups edits by page. It might be neat if the recent changes could group by book as well, and then under that by page. It could maybe be an extra sub option in preferences. Does that make sense? How does something like that seem? Emesee (talk) 01:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I like that idea alot. Being able to get all the recent changes to the pages in a book in a single click is a feature that many people ask for. Extending the watchlists to automatically group pages together for all books would be cool. Being able to add entire books at once to the watchlist would be better. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 02:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Alphabetical order method for DynamicPageList
The extension Dynamic Page List is used for automatic creation of bookshelves but books can be only listed in chronological order. So I developed a simple review of the extension to implement alphabetical order method. If you are interested you can find the bug here. --Ramac (talk) 12:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Serious shortcoming of "toolbox" > "Printable version"
I think there is a serious shortcoming in the way the "Printable version" is generated with the link in the "toolbox": it shows text within ... but it doesn't show text within ... . I consider this a serious shortcoming because a) it is inconsistent with the traditional "Print version" mechanism and b) it is inconsistent with the way the "PDF version" and the printing of collections work. Would it be possible to fix this problem, i.e., to show the printable version of the "included" page? Also, if a "Print version" of the current page exists, could the link show a printable version of the "Print version" page? --Martin Kraus (talk) 14:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Eventually the Print versions and PDF versions as we know them now will disappear and only collections will be used. It doesn't make sense to support all three, especially if completely different and opposite conventions are used between them. We can try to put in a bug report with the PediaPress people, but I suspect that the behavior they are using is the behavior that we would prefer to use in the long-run. If you have a book or see a book that uses old formatting to support a printable version, it would probably be a good idea to delete that print version and create a collection for the book instead. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 14:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The use of ... and ... is also supported by the collections extension, thus, I don't think this is "old formatting", is it? --Martin Kraus (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Category Redirects
I think changing how redirects are handled for categories could be helpful for Wikibooks. Imagine if instead of having to manually go to every page or book and change a category a category redirect would result in the books and pages appearing in the other category instead. This could solve some problems for us like:


 * Mixing American and British spelling of category names. One could redirect to the other and all books would show up.
 * Mixing different terminologies could be done (silly examples: Toilet, Lobe, John, Crapper, etc.) without a problem.
 * Mixing singular and plural names could be done (e.g Science, Sciences) without a problem.

Right now without this books are split between categories and people aren't likely to agree which is better to use. With this change, it wouldn't matter because they could all be used without causing an incomplete picture of what books or pages exist. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  20:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Stuff like this has been desired for some time - I don't know that anybody has put any thought into how to accomplish it effectively. A bugzilla search might reveal some past efforts. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 01:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)