Yes, I think you should. Make a German version of it, don't manually edit anything so we can see it warts and all. I'll then take that German copy and convert it back (but not publish on the wiki as its redundant) just to see how readable it is.
Ok, here we go.
Lazarus Examples Window
This wiki page is an attempt to capture people's thoughts wrt replacing the existing Examples Window in the Lazarus IDE.
Its based on this forum thread - https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,57680.0.html
Its (hopefully only initially) one person's view of the discussion.
It has a limited life, no need for it to exist after the matter is resolved (or abandoned).
content
1 Why is there a problem?
2 What should the user experience be like ?
3 How do we achieve this?
4 methodology
4.1 Examples Remain in Distribution.
4.2 Examples move online
5 The Meta Data File
6 See so
Why is there a problem?
The existing examples system has issues, perhaps in that it has not keep up Lazarus's own rapid development. There are a number of issues identified (in no particular order) -
Linux Lazarus installs based on (distro) Packages have the Examples in read only space.
Most examples do not have any indication of the topic covered other than file/project name.
Examples don't have a category system identifying who target audience is, beginner to advanced user.
Many examples are outdated, many don't, for example use the Lazarus Form Designer confusing new users who expect to see Object Inspector content.
The system is limited to only those examples shipped in the main Lazarus distribution, cannot cover eg examples applicable to OPM.
What should the user experience be like?
A user should be able to choose to see content appropriate to their experience.
Be able to see a summary of what an example is about before opening it.
Be able to open an example, have a play with it, make a few changes and recompile to see what happens. Maybe roll back to the original example if they make a full mess of it.
Examples should be generally short, contain appropriate, relevant code focused on one topic each. But there will me many exceptions to that.
If a user installs a third party package, eg via OPM, then any examples it contains should be treated in the same manner.
Be useful to allow a user to browse through example content while working on a real project, copy and past a snipit as required.
How do we achieve this?
There appears to be three key steps, reviewing all existing examples, adding meta data and redesigning the Examples Window is clearly necessary. A reasonably easy to work with metadata standard will ensure ongoing performance. Ensuring that standard is complied with in new Examples may be more than we should ask Lazarus Developers to be responsible for.
Third party packages is a gray area, many do not have examples at all (so bei it), some will have examples that can work with a proposed new system with just the addition of a metadata file. There will be situations where a "forth party" will produce an example without the cooperation of the package author.
We also need to keep in mind that by distributing, indexing or referring to Examples, we take on some Duty of Care to ensure that no Example contains malicious code and, perhaps, is Fit for Purpose.
That is about all we all agree on at present!
methodology
There appears to be two broad models available, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. Choosing one or the other model and determining what our metadata file looks like is the next phase.
Its likely that the metadata design is substantially the same either model.
Both Example Model will require -
An extensive review of all existing examples is required (for both models).
Additional of a metadata file.
A call for more examples.
A means to scan for 'other' examples, such as ones in OPM packages.
Examples Remain in Distribution.
This is the KISS solution, it involves the least structural change but may not necessarily involve less work. As well as reviewing and adding meta data, we may wish to re-organize the location of packages. The extensive changes that must happen to the existing examples will need Lazarus Developer involvement.
More to come
Examples move online
Possibly a simpler change because much of it is implemented externally, at some stage the Examples Window will need to be changed in the Lazarus Distro but lots of building, adjusting of existing Examples, testing can happen without annoying Lazarus Developers.
Prototype code to download files, index projects and build a master metadata file already exists.
A very rough and ready example repository has been established at https://gitlab.com/dbannon/laz_examples
Note that you can browse the repository, just looking for snipits of code, you can download a particular Example directory as a zip file and use it locally. This is perhaps, for many users, easier than closing their existing project, opening up the example, seeing what they are looking for and going back to their real project and continuing working. But you need online access....
An application now e
Seems they put a size restriction on the translator :-) Nevertheless I think the sample should do. The overall quality is much like English->German: readable, with some passages slightly "rocky" to read, from my personal judgement I'd say that English->German was somewhat "rockier", very likely because correct German grammar ist generally a bit messier than English. Surprisingly the translation back to English turned out "smoother", I expected more "bumps" to arise, in fact there are less. This may be either caused by the fact that the original was English, so it translates back easier by reverting the process, or by the fact that English is generally having a more "logical" structure than German. Anyway, I consider both ways usable, and a sigificant leap forward when it comes to the overall quality of the wiki.
A problem which needs some research could be that Google seems to try to restrict the full usage of their Translator to Chrome users, I use it through Firefox, but I had to install an Add-on. Maybe (very likely) there are technical restrictions applied by Google if one tries to use their technology by embedding translations or live links which translate a page without Chrome or in general, if everyone does that, I am afraid this would overload their translation infrastructure by several magnitudes.
I would, however, very reluctantly try to copy/paste a translated page into a wiki, since there is a forseeable update problem once passages of the English page are changed.
So I guess this strategy would work best [for many pages]: a well maintained English original, the author (or volunteers) reviewing the automated translations, tolerating all insignificant glitches. On foreign language pages, instead of a translated source, a hint (not a link) for users that a "robot translation friendly" English version is actively maintained, and that they please use any translator they like to view it.
I'll have a look at DeepL now.
Btw, I looked at your metadata file ... what should be incorporated is a JSON element which links to the Wiki article, along with a size restriction put on the metadata "Description" element. If one has to say more characters about his sample than fits in a SHORTSTRING, he better does that in the wiki.
Armin