30
$\begingroup$

As part of the mod tools, there is a tool to review and approve suggested edits. The "review suggested edits" shows something like below which is not of much help to review and approve the edit.

enter image description here

It makes more sense, especially on math.se, to show the final form of the post, including the typeset i.e the form it would appear on screen once it has been posted/approved.

This is of more relevance to math.se since most of suggested edits have got to do with some typesetting changes. It is hard to figure out what exactly the changes are and how they affect the post without looking at how they appear on the screen.

$\endgroup$
9
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Two work-arounds: (a) click on the "improve" button, which will bring up a normal editing screen and you can read the final forms. Downside is that then the edit will appear to be from you and not the person who proposed the edit. (b) If you are sure that the edits are only about math display and not about content, then click approve, navigate to the question, and read it over to see if you "really" approve. $\endgroup$
    – Willie Wong Mod
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Willie: My impression was that if you make no changes in the "improve" screen, it actually does not let you implement the edit from there (so there is no danger of the edit being incorrectly attributed); hence in my answer below I suggested pressing the back button and using the "approve" button. $\endgroup$
    – Zev Chonoles Mod
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:05
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ and (c) undergo intensive training with Knuth or Lamport in the secluded mountains of California for 3 months thereby acquiring the secret skill of parsing (La)TeX in your head. =p $\endgroup$
    – Willie Wong Mod
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Willie: Another way to master that is to write the macros and their output on the bottom of beer mugs. This is a great way to train, since you engrave the compilation into your subconscious! $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think this can be changed at the math.se level; but perhaps you can ask in meta.stackoverflow for a change, perhaps a link to a "Preview changes" like Wikipedia has. $\endgroup$
    – Arturo Magidin
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Arturo: I posted on meta.stackoverflow few minutes back meta.stackexchange.com/questions/103018/… $\endgroup$
    – user17762
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:23
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @Asaf Ah, so that explains why the swag mug design is taking so long... $\endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 22:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Sivaram: Well, it got closed as a duplicate, even though it was by no means a duplicate of the indicated post: you weren't complaining that there was "too much noise", you were asking for more stuff to be put there, in a way. $\endgroup$
    – Arturo Magidin
    Commented Aug 19, 2011 at 3:03
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ This is very interesting. There is an option, when reviewing suggested edits, to show the "actual" posts rather than the markdown differences. However, because of how the diff engine identifies and renders changes, it causes breaks in the MathJax that results in actual changes to the TeX not being displayed as their final result. Compare markdown diff with final diff, it's quite odd. I'll see if anyone knows if this can be altered in any fashion. $\endgroup$
    – Grace Note StaffMod
    Commented Aug 19, 2011 at 15:40

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
9
$\begingroup$

I had also been quite annoyed by this aspect of reviewing proposed edits. However, one solution is to click the "improve" button, which will show you exactly what you want (what the end result of the proposed edit would look like), and then if it is satisfactory, just hit the "back" button and approve it.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ @Willie: Yes. I have been doing what you and Zev have suggested. But am finding it increasing annoying. $\endgroup$
    – user17762
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Siv: I agree that it would be a good feature to have. Hence my comments are mere workarounds, not real answers. $\endgroup$
    – Willie Wong Mod
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:08
  • $\begingroup$ +1: This is what I always do, and I am used to it now (I used to find it annoying at some point in the past). $\endgroup$
    – Aryabhata
    Commented Aug 18, 2011 at 20:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I do that, but I'm slow and I often find that somebody's already approved it once I hit Back... :D $\endgroup$
    – J. M. ain't a mathematician
    Commented Aug 19, 2011 at 0:47
6
$\begingroup$

Well, not an entire solution, but simply click the small icon on the left to show the post in pure markup without rendering:

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I just tried that. It doesn't actually help since the changed $\LaTeX$ is not compiled. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Commented Sep 2, 2011 at 6:48
  • $\begingroup$ yes, it is at best a minor workaround for now $\endgroup$
    – Jeff Atwood Mod
    Commented Sep 2, 2011 at 6:51
5
$\begingroup$

Starting earlier today, we now treat formulas as single units when it comes to comparing them between revisions. The inline and side-by-side views show rendered formulas, and the "side-by-side markdown" view can be used to view the actual notation changes.

Inline:

enter image description here

Side-by-side:

enter image description here

Side-by-side markdown:

enter image description here

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.