Page MenuHomePhabricator

Associate non-body content such as annotations and talk to a location in the article
Open, MediumPublic


Associate non-body content such as annotations and talk to a location in the article.


  • Preserving the target association when content is edited.
  • On some articles we might be talking about hundreds of "annotations".
    • Need a clever UI to make this manageable.
  • More discussion = more moderation needs
    • Yup. Any change that encourages more people to write text also needs a way to encourage more people who can patrol & moderate. That's the engine that drove wiki development in the first place; we have to make sure we keep following that path.
  • This is closely related to having citations linked to the exact statement being corroborated.

See also T48440: Implement inline comment support using OKFN annotator (though Flow would be more likely to be the basis of a WMF implementation, rather than Extension:Annotator).

Imported from

Event Timeline

Mattflaschen-WMF raised the priority of this task from to Needs Triage.
Mattflaschen-WMF updated the task description. (Show Details)
Qgil triaged this task as Low priority.Feb 20 2015, 2:36 PM

@Qgil, yes (it's a very similar idea), but Extension:Annotator is not suitable for WMF use.

Also, it probably will not be the basis of the implementation if we do this. More likely, it would be integrated into StructuredDiscussions and VisualEditor.

Did anyone work on this task during Wikimedia-Hackathon-2015? If so, please post an update with the results. Otherwise remove the label.

Please confirm and promote this activity by assigning it to its owner, listing it or scheduling it at the Hackathon wiki page and by placing it in the right column at #Wikimania-Hackathon-2015. Thank you!

@Mattflaschen are you planning to work on this task at Wikimania?

No. This is an epic, and there has been no discussion about working on it in the short-term.

awight raised the priority of this task from Low to Medium.EditedDec 23 2015, 8:51 PM
awight awarded a token.

I don't see any reason this should be less than "Normal" priority, but feel free to revert my reprioritization. "Unscheduled" is fine, but the feature itself would have quite an impact, so I feel like this is an unfair way to use "Low".

Hey, can we use a different word from "annotations" here - say "remarks" or something?

We (the VE team) are greedy and we want to monopolize the word "annotations" to refer to the styling applied to bits of text (e.g. italic, links). It's used very heavily that way in the VE codebase (See ), and it will get really confusing if when discussing, say, nested annotations inside annotations (e.g. italic links inside remarks).

Re T89575#2733477, that would be very unwise as the (W3C: Web Annotation Working Group exists and is very vocal about "annotations", thus a lot of text will be published referring to annotations.

Annotations of glyphs vs annotations of prose are two different concepts, and I don't think people would confuse them.