Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Updates/2023-09-20

Architecture difference between naturals and booleans

I noticed a difference in the concept of booleans and numbers/naturals: In booleans, we chose to represent them as enumeration, giving us, as noted in the article, the possibility of translating the value names using the generic multilingual labeling mechanism of Wikifunctions. For the naturals, this is obviously impossible, so the mechanism of parsers and renderers is invented. However, in hindsight, wouldn't this be applicable to the booleans as well? I.e. having a simple value field, with naming and parsing the value left for the respective renderer and parser? Not that it would be worth changing, anyway, it was just a thought. Mormegil (cs) 18:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

That's a good point. Since Boolean is a type like every other type, it will, in fact, have renderers and parsers, and so will every enum. We will need to figure out how those interact. Initially, I expect booleans to remain with a bespoke component, but let's see how things develop. Thanks for the thought! -- DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 17:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)