Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| Internally it's just implemented as $wgUserTablePrefix, but that's not catchy and aliterative. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 18:34, 30 Aug 2004 (EEST)
| | People who write code that uses the phrase [[log in]] right in the [[user interface]] and then refer to the same feature as "sign on" are just stupid. If they can't think clearly enough to use the same name for the same thing all the time, they can't think clearly enough to code it properly either. |
|
| |
|
| :It would be nice if [[API]]s always reflected [[GUI]]s, but there are too many morons coding both to make that reliable. Call it the same thing as you do on the user's screen, i.e. [[single login]], using that word/phrase "login" or "log in" consistently, and there will be no confusion about what you mean or what features are being implied. | | :"Single sign-on" is iirc the established CS term for this kind of functionality. That propably explains the lapse in naming. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 12:29, 29 Aug 2004 (EEST) |
|
| |
|
| ::You can name something as soon as you get off your fat arse and code something. Until then, quit your whinging. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 10:45, 31 Aug 2004 (EEST) | | ::Never heard it before. But in any case if they call it login in mediawiki this has to be called single login, since it's a mediawiki feature, right? |
|
| |
|
| :::Seconds! --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 10:46, 31 Aug 2004 (EEST) | | ::Try getting sloppy on names with a compiler. |
|
| |
|
| ::::Coders do not make [[ontology]] choices in any reasonable project. There is no chance that this can lead to anything but disaster. Which anyone who has done any [[data warehouse]] work knows from firsthand pain. It's the [[user interface designer]]s that actually make the choices about what things are called, in a reasonable project, and the [[management accounting]] categories, e.g. [[styles of capital]], that determine the deeper categorization systems. | | :::Internally it's just implemented as $wgUserTablePrefix, but that's not catchy and aliterative. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 18:34, 30 Aug 2004 (EEST) |
| | |
| ::::Besides [[trolls]] do not listen to [[developer vigilantiism|developer vigilantes]] of no particular talent. Though they will answer [[Lowest Troll]]s they respect, usually. The latest bout of hack-backs on essential articles is a sign however that [[Wikimedia corruption]] may be spreading to this wiki.
| |
| | |
| :::::You're not going to listen to me but you expect me to listen to you? Why should I do that? -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 07:50, 1 Sep 2004 (EEST)
| |
| | |
| ::::::Because all of us [[trolls]] are wiser than all of you [[developer]]s, mate.
| |
| | |
| :::::::ROFLMAO -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 03:00, 2 Sep 2004 (EEST)
| |
| | |
| ::::::::assume you mean Refusing the Obvious For Life, Making Australia 'Orrific?
| |
| | |
| Ils sont mignons tous les deux ;-) ant (editors translation: They are nice both)
| |