Commons-l June 2007

commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org

29 participants
23 discussions

Re: [Commons-l] Monobook.css update?
by Monahon, Peter B. 20 Jun '07

20 Jun '07

> bawolff wrote: "... Out of curiosity, can > you give an example of what can't be > currently done in rearranging the styles > which you think could or should be > done. In my opinion, if you take the > time, you can change it to pretty > much anything. -bawolff Peter Blaise responds: Maybe we're talking about different things. I'm only suggesting that we put our energy into making the MediaWiki interface itself more capable ... so we don't have to go out and use text editing tools and programming language savvy to change configuration files ... because editing *.php or *.css files (and so on) is an order of magnitude more complex (and off-putting) than the next wave of MediaWiki adopters can successfully handle and self-maintain. In other words, if we want to reduce the overwhelming (and growing) support demands while expanding the audience for MediaWiki installations, we have to empower the main program itself to be all powerful regarding the installation, setup, configuration, and maintenance of the MediaWiki experience. Yes, experienced *.php and *.css (and so on) tweakers can tune a MediaWiki installation to a faretheewell. But, the problem is, they have to! And, the uninitiated are either blocked out from enjoying the MediaWiki experience, or try to get started, and then overwhelm the support channels with newbie questions across the spectrum - installation, setup, configuration, and maintenance. We can either say, "Learn (or hire) PHP and css skills," or we can incorporate the tasks into the MediaWiki interface once and for all. My goal, or the target is: if the admin has to go outside of MediaWiki for anything relating to installation, setup, configuration, and maintenance, then we have more to do to make the MediaWiki interface smarter! That is all. Of course, there are more words in the list: installation, setup, configuration, maintenance, customization, backup, verify, restore, export, import, make reports, reorganize, language change, make PDFs, repurpose contents, import contents form other sources, automate data exchange, and so on. And, on. And, on. Am I thinking of MediaWiki version 4 or version 1.12? -- Peter Blaise

1 0

Monobook.css update?
by bawolff 19 Jun '07

19 Jun '07

> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 10:20:05 -0400 > From: "Monahon, Peter B." <Peter.Monahon(a)USPTO.GOV> > Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Monobook.css update? > To: commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Message-ID: > <13E609DD5C46E64EBC847D37B677370D0817C9B7(a)EXCHANGE2.uspto.gov> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Simetrical wrote: You seem to be confusing > > two issues: the ability to edit styles from > > within MediaWiki, and the ability to do it > > without technical know-how ... > > Peter Blaise responds: Actually, I am trying to rise above both issues. > > There was a call for putting energies into redesigning monobook.css for "commons" (to differentiate it visually so contributors knew they were at "commons" and not another wiki - apparently there is at least one person who got confused and wants the on-screen interface design to help distinguish between wikis for them). > > In response, I suggested that instead, put energies into maturing the MediaWiki interface itself to become the place where ALL configuration is done. > > In other words, NOT as much a cry for dumbing down the need for *.css skills (which MUST die anyway, eventually), but a cry for growing the sysops/bureaucrat/admin/developer/registereduser/bot/user/reader/printer/yada,yada,yada interface to take over more and more control of anything and everything anyone does in a MediaWiki. > > Otherwise, we're just rearranging the deck chairs. > > -- Peter Blaise Out of curiosity, can you give an example of what can't be currently done in rearranging the styles which you think could or should be done. In my opinion, if you take the time, you can change it to pretty much anything. -bawolff

1 0

Re: [Commons-l] Monobook.css update?
by Monahon, Peter B. 16 Jun '07

16 Jun '07

> Simetrical wrote: You seem to be confusing > two issues: the ability to edit styles from > within MediaWiki, and the ability to do it > without technical know-how ... Peter Blaise responds: Actually, I am trying to rise above both issues. There was a call for putting energies into redesigning monobook.css for "commons" (to differentiate it visually so contributors knew they were at "commons" and not another wiki - apparently there is at least one person who got confused and wants the on-screen interface design to help distinguish between wikis for them). In response, I suggested that instead, put energies into maturing the MediaWiki interface itself to become the place where ALL configuration is done. In other words, NOT as much a cry for dumbing down the need for *.css skills (which MUST die anyway, eventually), but a cry for growing the sysops/bureaucrat/admin/developer/registereduser/bot/user/reader/printer/yada,yada,yada interface to take over more and more control of anything and everything anyone does in a MediaWiki. Otherwise, we're just rearranging the deck chairs. -- Peter Blaise

1 0

Monobook.css update?
by bawolff 16 Jun '07

16 Jun '07

Original message: > From: Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> > Date: Jun 15, 2007 7:51 PM > Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Commons-l] Monobook.css update? > To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > > > On 6/15/07, Robert Leverington <lcarsdata(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > ... instead of having to search for and find and hand edit *.css, *.js, > > > *.ini, *.conf, *.php and so on files. I say, do all that programming > > > ONCE, and do it INSIDE a new version of the MediaWiki distribution > > > program. Then let sysops/admins tweak everything to their heart's > > > content from within the MediaWiki program without having to become > > > OS/MySQL/PHP/CSS/and-so-on programming nerds (with NO documentation > > > skills, apparently?!?). You want the commons blue? Make it blue from > > > WITHIN MediaWiki, rather than hand coding a new *.css! > > You seem to be confusing two issues: the ability to edit styles from > within MediaWiki, and the ability to do it without technical know-how. > We have the former: you can do a tremendous amount with > MediaWiki:Monobook.css, even though no projects that I know of have > done more than tiny tweaks. Although no project has adopted a major css skin change, that is not to say they don't exist. Take for example the datrio+mrm skin on the english wikinews (view->page style->Datrio+MrM in firefox and Opera, [[n:wikinews:Skins]] for other browsers) or the egyptian skin from the user skin gallery on meta. They are extremely different from the default monobook css. > > The second issue is the knowledge of CSS required to do all this. > That part is substantial. If someone wants to design a simple > special-page extension that will generate a pretty interface to the > CSS, perhaps the Foundation would be interested in enabling it on its > wikis. Then again, perhaps not, if it prefers uniformity among its > own projects (and I think you can make a strong argument for that -- > although all things being equal, I'd guess the Foundation would let > its wikis style things however the community wants them). Either way, > I'm personally not interested in coding such a thing, but if someone > else wants to, they can go ahead. > > > This idea is very interesting, I can already imagine what this could > > look like - I am forwarding this to the wikitech-l mailing list so > > that the people involved in that can also add their ideas. No doubt > > this would require some nifty JavaScript though. > > It wouldn't require JavaScript unless you wanted to get really fancy, > like letting people drag around interface elements. A simple form > allowing entry of various colors, borders, background images, etc. > would suffice, with some extra options for moving around stuff like > the logo and parts of the sidebar. I think most people who are willing to put the necessary effort into designing something well, would probably be willing to experiment with css. most people are able to figure out what a rule like "body {background-color: white;}" does. but that is just my uninformed opinion (which is probably wrong). -bawolff

1 0

Monobook.css update?
by bawolff 16 Jun '07

16 Jun '07

> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:39:54 -0400 > From: Cary Bass <cbass(a)wikimedia.org> > Subject: [Commons-l] Monobook.css update? > To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > Message-ID: <4671998A.3090106(a)wikimedia.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > IMHO, the old monobook is getting old and tired, and it's marginally > relevant to Wikimedia Commons. And it's so similar to many of the > projects that it's not always easy to tell that you've moved from one > wiki to another. > > And, judging from offsite conversations, some of you are agreeing with me. > But not all of us are good at designing skins. And how do we change it > while upsetting the least amount of people? > > I propose that we formulate a contest to come up with a new, more > exciting monobook.css. > > What do you all think? > > -C Wikinews had a design contest once ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews_design_contest ). Problem is no one could agree on anything but that the current monobook sucked for anything not an encyclopedia (and to this day, that is the prevailing opinion more or less) . Anyways, one of the useful things we did do that might be useful for your contest, is make some of the entries alternate stylesheets on wikinews. This allowed people to try them out easily without going through [[special:mypage/monobook.css]]. For example, goto any page on the english wikinews. On a browser that supports alt stylesheets (like firefox, opera), View->Page Style->foo. Good luck -bawolff

1 0

Re: [Commons-l] Monobook.css update?
by Monahon, Peter B. 15 Jun '07

15 Jun '07

> Cary wrote: ... monobook is getting old > ... and it's marginally relevant to > Wikimedia Commons ... so similar to > many of the projects that it's not ... > easy to tell that you've moved from one > wiki to another ... But not all of us are > good at designing skins ... how do we > change it while upsetting the least > amount of people? I propose ... a > contest to come up with a new, more > exciting monobook.css ... -C Peter Blaise responds: I know this is a "commons" discussion list, so my contribution in this thread is specious, but where else should we discuss this ... and you started it! So... Although I agree with much of your observations, I disagree with your conclusions. I suggest that we instead design a new MediaWiki front end to allow the look and feel and function of any MediaWiki element to be customized USING MediaWiki directly through the same interface everyone else uses. ... instead of having to search for and find and hand edit *.css, *.js, *.ini, *.conf, *.php and so on files. I say, do all that programming ONCE, and do it INSIDE a new version of the MediaWiki distribution program. Then let sysops/admins tweak everything to their heart's content from within the MediaWiki program without having to become OS/MySQL/PHP/CSS/and-so-on programming nerds (with NO documentation skills, apparently?!?). You want the commons blue? Make it blue from WITHIN MediaWiki, rather than hand coding a new *.css! I hope my 2 cents catches someone's imagination. I'm not up to either task - customizing MediaWiki using the current resources as a one-off design, nor programming such a modern interface enhancement tool as an upgrade included into MediaWiki. I just want one. And the people I'm trying to get to adopt MediaWiki would really appreciate it. That said, keeping everything as "Wikipedia" as possible makes training and experience with one transferable to any other. "Have you seen Wikipedia?" "Yes." "Well, then, THIS is the exactly same. Dive in and enjoy!" Works for me. In other words, I'm reframing the challenge: rather than adding yet another one-off skin, why not design a "skin designer" and incorporate it right into MediaWiki? ;-) -- Peter Blaise

5 4

Fwd: [Wikitech-l] Monobook.css update?
by Bryan Tong Minh 15 Jun '07

15 Jun '07

And forwarded back to Commons-l ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> Date: Jun 15, 2007 7:51 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Commons-l] Monobook.css update? To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> On 6/15/07, Robert Leverington <lcarsdata(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > ... instead of having to search for and find and hand edit *.css, *.js, > > *.ini, *.conf, *.php and so on files. I say, do all that programming > > ONCE, and do it INSIDE a new version of the MediaWiki distribution > > program. Then let sysops/admins tweak everything to their heart's > > content from within the MediaWiki program without having to become > > OS/MySQL/PHP/CSS/and-so-on programming nerds (with NO documentation > > skills, apparently?!?). You want the commons blue? Make it blue from > > WITHIN MediaWiki, rather than hand coding a new *.css! You seem to be confusing two issues: the ability to edit styles from within MediaWiki, and the ability to do it without technical know-how. We have the former: you can do a tremendous amount with MediaWiki:Monobook.css, even though no projects that I know of have done more than tiny tweaks. You could, for instance, change background images, fonts, positioning, and so on. If you look at the HTML source, for instance, the navigation sidebar is marked up identically to the content action buttons (talk, edit, history, ...): it's just CSS that distinguishes the two, having one arranged vertically on the left with bullets and the other horizontally on the top in boxes, and that can be changed from within the wiki. The second issue is the knowledge of CSS required to do all this. That part is substantial. If someone wants to design a simple special-page extension that will generate a pretty interface to the CSS, perhaps the Foundation would be interested in enabling it on its wikis. Then again, perhaps not, if it prefers uniformity among its own projects (and I think you can make a strong argument for that -- although all things being equal, I'd guess the Foundation would let its wikis style things however the community wants them). Either way, I'm personally not interested in coding such a thing, but if someone else wants to, they can go ahead. > This idea is very interesting, I can already imagine what this could > look like - I am forwarding this to the wikitech-l mailing list so > that the people involved in that can also add their ideas. No doubt > this would require some nifty JavaScript though. It wouldn't require JavaScript unless you wanted to get really fancy, like letting people drag around interface elements. A simple form allowing entry of various colors, borders, background images, etc. would suffice, with some extra options for moving around stuff like the logo and parts of the sidebar. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

1 0

Monobook.css update?
by Cary Bass 15 Jun '07

15 Jun '07

IMHO, the old monobook is getting old and tired, and it's marginally relevant to Wikimedia Commons. And it's so similar to many of the projects that it's not always easy to tell that you've moved from one wiki to another. And, judging from offsite conversations, some of you are agreeing with me. But not all of us are good at designing skins. And how do we change it while upsetting the least amount of people? I propose that we formulate a contest to come up with a new, more exciting monobook.css. What do you all think? -C

6 7

Categories and galleries combined
by bawolff 12 Jun '07

12 Jun '07

somebody wrote: >Some bullets and points comparing categories and galleries: > - Categories are easier to add to an image, as you merely add the > [[Category:foo]] while adding other info anyway Currently categories are sorted by doing [[category:foo|sortkey]]. What if when you added the sort key, it would auto-appear as the caption in the magic category galleries. for example: putting [[category:cat|My cat Mr. Twinkles]] on the image of mr teinkles, the images on that category would have: ________ | | | pict of | | cat | |________| |My cat Mr| | Twinkles| ------------ instead of no caption at all. Also wouldn't it make more sense to have some sort of parserFunction like {{#UnusedImageFromCat: category:foo}} that displays the non-used images so then the gallery could be made to fit around the non-used images with appropriate headings edited in, rather then it automatically just thrown at the bottom with a one size fits all for how it is displayed? -bawolff

2 1

Meet our photographers page?
by David Gerard 11 Jun '07

11 Jun '07

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Meet_our_photographers Anyone adding themselves to this? (No, I haven't myself as yet ...) I ask because I have use right now for some examples of photographers who contribute professional-quality work under GFDL *and sell it as well* to those who don't want to simply use it under GFDL. (Because GFDL is easy to obey in books and on the web, but damn near impossible in magazines or pamphlets.) I have some photographers I want to convince that putting stuff on Commons is good advertising for their talents. - d.

11 27

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Commons-l June 2007