Writing a : in visual editor shouldnt add a blockquote but a : to the source code
Problem: Writing a : and getting a blockquote is not intuitive and breaks with the convention of being able to write source code in the visual editor. There is also no other way to get an : into the source code. Equations are always indented with a : so it's an important feature to have.
Who would benefit: Everybody who needs an : indent aka everybody who writes equations.
@Nabloodel: Note : is not intended to be used for indentations in article text. : creates a definition list (which is why VE maps it to blockquote instead, which is a proper indentation). This is a very unfortunate and longstanding habit that grew out of talk page discussions, but it is VERY bad for people relying on screenreaders to read an article
This is most often used with equations, which look weird with no indentation. I know of no other ways of indenting them. So maybe add a paragraph style for equations instead (and use a bot to change millions of :<math> to the new style)?
Editors should never have to use html tags. That's why we have the wiki markup language. Paragraph styles are the way to go; we use them for headings and quotes, there should be one for math equations. Ponor (talk) 21:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that under the dropdown menu for there are two options that I normally can't click on, even in articlespace: Decrease indentation and increase indentation, both of which have keyboard shortcuts. Any clue as to why those may have been disabled? Tenryuu (talk) 04:23, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu, I did a quick test: increase/decrease indentation were enabled when the cursor is in a list item and disabled when it's a normal paragraph. (When I changed a paragraph to a bullet-item, I needed to click away somewhere else then put the cursor back into the changed block for the menu to update.) Hope that helps, Pelagic (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Equations can be indented by <math display=block> instead of :<math> so :-indentation is not really required for that. Threading of discussion pages is a bigger issue. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimarkup : does not do a <blockquote>, it does a <dd> (which is actually invalid markup in most circumstances). This problem does need to be fixed, but it is to use a <div>, <article>, or something else (especially on talk pages, perhaps with IDs for thread-building). The short version is that <dl> markup is only valid if there is a <dl>...</dl> that contains at least one <dt> followed by either another <dt> or a <dd>; and at least one <dd> preceded by either a <dt> or another <dd> (that is, at least one each of <dt> and <dd> must be present, and in that order). Thus, every use of : markup that is not preceded by a ; instance (either immediately or with one or more other intervening : instances) is invalid. Same goes for any ; that isn't followed by a :, either immediately or with an intervening additional ;. If these conditions are not met, then ;... should be converted to ''...''[blank line here] (or directly into <p style="font-weight: bold;">...</p>). There's been a ticket open about this, in every MW bug-tracker, since the dawn of time, and the devs just never do anything about it. This is probably the no. 1 HTML-compliance problem in MW, and it's what makes talk pages (and many articles) a confusing hellhole of invalid list gibberish for users of screen readers. It's utterly shameful that this has not been fixed yet. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 06:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I heartily agree with you about the abuse of definition lists, @SMcC. Which might be why they mapped the ':' magic key in VE to <blockquote> instead of the <dd> that you would get from literal wikitext :. Most of the other magic keystrokes are the same as their wikitext equivalents, but this is an exception. Maybe the key could be '>' instead of ':', or they could require the space after ': ' like they do with '# ' and '* '.
Thanks for the counter-correction. I had no idea that VE was doing something different here. But ARGH! It's just trading one spec-violating markup abuse for another one. The <blockquote> element is reserved for actual quoted material (only, not even include citation information for it). WhyTF can't they just get it through their heads that <span>, <div>, <article> and other generic, non-semantic elements exist for a reason? It's like their development is being directed by Basil Fawlty. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 00:34, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem is that we don't have a standard, agreed way to "do indentation" in HTML. Blockquote adds extra vertical space, and a grey left bar, and has specific semantics. Naked DD is so wrong that I almost have an apoplexy every time I think on it. Then we nest them 10 deep?! What would be useful is a set of classes like "mw-indent-1", "mw-indent-2", with a new wikitext symbol that maps to those. Maybe '.' at the beginning of a line? ..My indented comment isn't a big leap from ::My indented comment, and ties in with a traditional use of dots as leaders. Only problem with that is if someone wants to start a line with an ellipsis. Perhaps ',' instead? It's not something that would normally appear at the beginning of a line, even singly. ,,My indented comment. It looks weird, but so does '''''bold italic'''''. Pelagic (talk) 23:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is essentially what the devs have been told by us (with actual HTML compliance experience) for nearly 20 years, and they just don't do it. It's like arguing with a cat. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 00:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but see above. This has not been described correctly. The problem is much more specific than this, and a much more severe problem than a trivial one about layout stuff. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 06:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]