2

I recently came across edit history for a recent question.

The most recent 2 edits are a little odd, and I think they should both be rolled back. In both cases, the editor (not the OP) changed the question. The first edit involved substantial changes to the question, and the second involved some more minor changes, but they are still not appropriate IMHO. The only appropriate edits was the addition of the internet-explorer-9 & file-upload tags.

My first instinct was to roll back all edits, but I've never made such a drastic change, and I wanted to ask the community first.

Thoughts?

  • 1
    I don't follow - to me, the edits make the question much more readable and understandable. I don't see the drastic change? – Pëkka Feb 10 '14 at 22:22
  • 1
    The question shines after that edit. – Sergey K. Feb 10 '14 at 22:23
  • 1
    Related (I had to look it up myself): What is a polyfill in Javascript? – Pëkka Feb 10 '14 at 22:23
  • The original question was, in fact, asking for a library recommendation. The first edit changed this entirely. The second edit made some assumptions about the situation where the OP would want to grab file sizes. It's never really appropriate to query for this information during a form submit. The second edit was a technical one, and the editor doesn't appear to have a good enough grasp of the underlying concepts to make that edit. – Ray Nicholus Feb 10 '14 at 22:24
  • 1
    The OP says he wants "a polyfill (or any solution)", and the edit saved the question from being closed. I'd call that fair. The "form submission" addition may not be perfect, but I don't see the damage it is supposed to cause. – Pëkka Feb 10 '14 at 22:29
4

From your comments:

The original question was, in fact, asking for a library recommendation. The first edit changed this entirely. The second edit made some assumptions about the situation where the OP would want to grab file sizes.

The first edit was good.

Library recommendations aren't on topic here! However, the question was describing the step, not the goal. The thought process was roughly:

  1. I want to find out the size of a file in IE 8/9.
  2. I am sure I can do it with a library of some sort.
  3. The question: Are there any libraries for checking file sizes in IE 8/9?

The only thing the first edit did was make the question ask about the goal — determine the size of a file in JavaScript — whilst eliminating this assumption that the answer must necessarily involve a library.

This still preserves the actual problem the asker is trying to solve. It is even an improvement on the question, considering the asker shouldn't have been asking about the step in the first place: what if there isn't a library, but there is a solution?

The second edit was not.

I agree with you on the second edit. It ought to be rolled back, as it introduces new information that doesn't appear to come from anywhere. The asker never hints at form submission in the original.

The asker does mention uploading and validation, but the same could be done entirely through means such as an AJAX request with no forms involved at all.

  • Yep, I'm quite aware that library recs are of-topic (in fact I was one of the closers of the question for that very reason). It just seemed out of place to change the intent of the question, even though the original intent made the question OT. – Ray Nicholus Feb 10 '14 at 22:32
  • @RayNicholus The intent of the question wasn't changed though. I've edited my answer a little bit to explain: see the two paragraphs after the bullet points. – doppelgreener Feb 10 '14 at 22:34
  • Ok, the first edit sticks, but the second one...? Consensus? – Ray Nicholus Feb 10 '14 at 22:35
  • @Ray The second one should not stick. – doppelgreener Feb 10 '14 at 22:40
  • 1
    My reasoning for invalidating the second edit mirror yours at the end of your answer. However, 2 in this thread have mentioned that they think the edit is ok, and 2 have expressed a desire to roll that edit back. I'll wait until there is at least a majority "vote" for the rollback before I do that. – Ray Nicholus Feb 10 '14 at 22:49
  • Ok, I'm going to roll back the second edit. – Ray Nicholus Feb 11 '14 at 5:28
0

I think the edits are mostly useful, and didn't change the meaning of the question. I would say leave it as it is, because the edits appear to only clarify the question and fix the asker's (quite bad) grammar.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .