Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Gadgets vs. Widgets

From Rosetta Code

Had a discussion with User:Short_Circuit today about MediaWiki extensions for JavaScript functionality. Namely using the Gadgets extension vs. using the Widgets extension for JavaScript functionality. For some comparison:


Allows users to enable or disable various JavaScript functionality, very similar to the "My Scripts" menu on Rosetta_Code:Village_Pump/Javascript_Functionality_Add

  • Not currently installed
  • Configurable on a user-by-user basis
  • Site-wide - scripts apply to all pages
  • Scripts have to check the page they're on to make sure they should apply


Allows page authors to add a chunk of HTML code (including JavaScript) to a page using template-like syntax

  • Already installed
  • Not configurable on a user-by-user basis - they're either enabled site-wide or disabled entirely
  • Is page- or template-specific - for example, we can add the Language Comparison script to only the task pages
  • Scripts would not have to detect if they're on the correct type of page to activate themselves

--Tyrok1 01:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Additional considerations

AFAIK, Gadgets requires me to bestow Sysop-level access to the wiki. Considering that the Gadgets extension doesn't suppport per-user configuration, I can understand why it would require a high level of access. I expect the requirement comes from the individual gadgets being contained in the MediaWiki namespace. However, it should alow me to at least move those privs to an explicit privelage group, and use a different namespace. The more work has to be done at Sysop level, the less inclined I am to use it. --Michael Mol 03:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)