From Brevy
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is used to provide users with a general idea of Brevy's development plans for the future. It can also be used to discuss suggestions for implementing the features listed below or to request features via the discussion page. Before commenting on the discussion page, please review the information below to see if your issue has already been noted.

Intended Features

Please note that although each of these features are intended, we can't guarantee we will get to them, or that we will get to them in any reasonable time frame. You might then consider this Brevy's "wishlist" of sorts.

High Priority (or in progress)

  • Beta testing!
  • Concern flags on pages - We're (slowly) working on adding checkboxes to the summary edit form to note whether there are any particular issues with the page (such as it being controversial, biased, etc.) for others to come and fix.
  • Automated citations - We're (slowly) working on trying to get it were you do not need to manually enter the citation data for a summary. What we would love even more is to automate this via the user providing the DOI. Suggestions welcome on how to do the DOI part through Semantic Forms. Excited to say this is finished!
  • More automation in general! - We've got a couple ideas to make the summary form even easier to use while still being just as powerful Done! But we'll add more options as time goes on!
  • Captcha on registration - We will eventually add a simple Captcha on registration to prevent spam users. Done!
  • Types of research - We'd like to encourage adding industrial and open-source research summaries to the site also and yet still keep them recognized differently than typical academic research. We have an idea for this planned and shall implement it reasonably soon.

Medium Priority

  • Language support
  • More consistent talk page setup - Right now we have an extension that auto-creates talk pages but only for the main namespace. We'd like to edit this to also include things like the brevy and community namespaces also.

Low Priority

  • Better summary edit loading - You've probably noticed how the summary edit form loads oddly and doesn't show the tabs at the top until it's finished. We'd like to fix this but don't know how. Suggestions welcome.
  • Better notification systems
  • Mobile friendly layout
  • Community news/blogging - Eventually we would like to add some system for the community to keep everyone abreast of the significant research in their field. Until our community grows considerably larger, however, this is not useful.
  • Kudos/Gratis System - We'd like to have some means for users to gain (and potentially give) "kudos" of sorts for contributing to Brevy. This will likely have some functionality in terms of who might be selected as admins.
  • Better search capabilities - We would like to have a single use form that can search both semantic data for summaries as well as full text. This is high on our list, but we are currently limited by the capabilities of the Semantic MediaWiki software, so it ends up temporarily in low priority. Contributions to this are welcome.
  • Different skin or color schema - Even though we're a wiki, we're not wikipedia, so it wouldn't hurt to look a little different.

Unlikely Features

  • No character limits - We believe strongly in forcing brevity on our summaries even though it may be difficult. Although we may consider upping the character limits in the future, most requests for this will be ignored as we constantly evaluate it.

Currently Impossible Features

  • Javascript editor in summaries - At the moment, we unfortunately can not add rich text editors to (more than one field at least) in the summary edit form. We may consider, however, adding it to the community namespace.

Currently Considering

  • Sponsored Research Institutions - Although our current aim is to keep Brevy as ad-free as possible, we've considered that allowing research institutions to sponsor the site might not be that bad an idea as any "ads" that would come from it might be in the users' interest. We'd love to hear feedback on this on the discussion page here.