Forum:(Solved) HTML on wiki
I have issues with spacing of externally linked images, and embedding HTML5 YouTube videos (the
<youtube> tag needs flash player, which I would like to circumvent). I found out, that there is a universal solution for this, that allows me to place some HTML code on places, where there is a need for them, namely by using the
<html> tag, which is disabled by default on MediaWiki. I would like to ask, if the web-admin can enable me this function on my instance. Thanks. --MYself (talk) 14:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- Enable raw HTML? In a word: no. Like how the MediaWiki manual page notes, it's basically a huge security vulnerability on a public site. It might work for certain, very limited use cases, such as corporate intranets and other sites with extremely tight security restrictions and where the contributors identities are known, but that's about it.
- It seems that the YouTube linking code has indeed changed since the last time our YouTube extension was updated. Updating the YouTube extension shouldn't be too complicated, I hope, but I'm afraid it has to wait for a while since we're preparing for the upcoming MediaWiki 1.22 release and that's our #1 priority in order to ensure a smooth upgrade from the current version. --Jack Phoenix (contact) 07:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
(Unindent). With mw:Extension:HTML5video all the video is stored on Shoutwiki instead of on Youtube and other video sites. That could greatly increase the amount of storage needed for Shoutwiki. Storage costs money.
- I'm interested only in embeding YouTube videos yet. In the future, if I decide to make some on my own, I will use a MediaGoblin instance (gobblin.se) for storage, then embed them on my page. Also for images, I would like to store them elsewhere (TinyPic, Ubuntu One), but what can I do if ShoutWiki doesn't allow me to do so?
- The problem is that it requires Flash Player, which is a nasty proprietary plugin required to play the majority of streaming videos. There are free software replacements for it (most notably Gnash/Lightspark) that works only on a few selected websites, but even if they can work, they're bearing the same technical weaknesses as their proprietary brother (running binary executables, slow/jerky, keeps crashing the browser, requires additional installation, more). Futhermore, they're not available cross-platform, locking other users out of watching videos on Flash-supported websites without using the blob, provided by Adobe (not all platforms are supported, e.g. Android/Linux). HTML5 is the next-generation technology designed to solve all of these issues. That's why Wikipedia followed the same route by adopting it. --MYself (talk) 11:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think you should use 2 threads for this discussion. 1 for videos and 1 for images. Otherwise this is too complicated, and people are less likely to respond. I am going to focus on videos. I suggest you change the title of this thread to something with "videos" in it.
- I am not into this whole religious belief in "open standards" and "open formats". I am a pragmatist first, and an idealist second. So I am quite happy with Youtube and Flash. It works fine for me. So I probably am not going to be able to help you out. I still do not understand why you do not like Flash. Is it not working for you in the mainstream browsers? I am not concerned about Linux, etc. and other minor players.
- My problem with Flash is in ads. I use the Firefox addon Flashblock for that and other reasons. It puts an on-off icon at the top of Firefox so that I decide when to allow Flash in general. It also puts on-off play buttons on all Flash windows embedded in pages. I leave Flash off in general most of the time, and only click on individual windows when I want to see something. It makes my video blog pages load really fast for example.
- You're looking at this from a practical point-of-view, rather than an ethical one. If Adobe decides to release the source code of Flash Player under a free software license (or at least the full specification of SWF format), which will never happen anyway, we can talk about this issue further. Until then, this is meaningless, because my question was "How to embed YouTube videos that will play without using Flash Player?", and not "What's the problem with Adobe Flash?". The whole point here is that Adobe's Flash Player is non-free, proprietary software. My wiki (still in development) is about providing solutions for people migrating from proprietary to free software. For more information, including what "free software" is (not to be confused with "freeware"), follow here. --MYself (talk) 13:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
(unindent). OK, I see now. It is not clear that your wiki is about open-source freeware. I suggest you describe your wiki on the main page of your wiki. Otherwise, people will wonder why you don't want Flash, etc.. I also suggest you put some links on your main page and sidebar to some of the pages and categories of your wiki. So people can see some examples of what your wiki is about.
I also suggest you link to your wiki from your user page here on the Shoutwiki Hub:
- It seems like you didn't understand anything from what I said. Where did you get that my wiki is about "open-source freeware"?! These are two totally different development models, that has nothing to do with "free software". In a nutshell, the differences are:
- Free Software (FOSS/FLOSS) - the exact oposite of proprietary software. Not only the source code must be available, but it needs to be under a license, that respect the essential rights of the user (see the four-freedom rules). Therefore, the user controls the software, and not the other way. An example of a free software is MediaWiki.
- Open Source (OSS/OSI) - focuses solely on technical benefits having the source code released; can be proprietary (e.g. Truecrypt)
- Freeware - comes with no cost; can be proprietary (e.g. Skype)
- As you can see, "free software" has nothing to do with anything you mentioned. In fact, I encourage users to buy free software (or at least make a donation), and to not use open source software that does not respect their essential rights (e.g. modify the source code, then publish changes to the Internet).
- As I said before, the wiki is still under development, and this means that I need to fill it with contents first (anything other is secondary now). There is my Trisquel profile page, that can be considered as the defacto "Main page", until all the important stuff is up, and I'll create the missing logo, main page, and my local profile page (currently I'm not even working on the project itself, just the documentation part). The wiki is not in shape for a basic showcase yet, so commentary about what can be done better should be omitted.
(unindent). Hey, I only described your wiki in layman's terms from the few pages I was able to find on it by looking at recent changes. People only know what your wiki is if you tell them. You might try linking to your Trisquel profile page from the wiki and your user page here. Then people would have more of an idea of where you are coming from. Or keep being obtuse. I don't care.
And since you are asking for help from other wiki editors you might try not being such a self-righteous pain in the ass. Jusy sayin'. :O
- I think we're done here. I've taken the time to answer all of your questions, and all I've got was such an ungratefulness from your side. This speaks for itself. --MYself (talk) 20:07, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think it's safe to say this conversion is over - gone completely away from the topic (which is embedding HTML, not Flash or open source) and tension has clearly risen, names are being called and that's really not the point of the forums. I'd like to think we are all mature enough to be able to discuss topics without the need of insults and hostility.--Cook879 talk 23:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)