Hello folks,
Did you see this before? http://wikimedia-ui.wmflabs.org ..a simple way
to get the code for the graphics you want. Very neat. Helps us all build
a clean and visiually unified look of pages.
I spotted it in the In the recent discovery and reading showcae [0]. Bravo
and thanks to May Tee-Galloway :)
Best,
Moushira
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNAQD4RCeWM
There is a conversation going on here about consolidating constructive
and progressive buttons: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T110555
I want to find out if any of you have used these buttons in your
interface and have done any testing with your users to see if they
understand the difference between the two. Also, if you have used it
in other ways that has been helpful to your users, chime in!
Progressive (blue) conveys to the user that they are starting or
continuing a multi-step process.
Constructive (green) conveys to the user they are completing a single
or multi-step process. In most case Constructive color shows the user
what will happen. In others it is feedback that the action has
completed. For example, thanking a user, adding a page to a watch
list.
--
Related discussion about button consolidation:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T110565
mm
We are now working on the "Cases" page of the draft Code of conduct.
This will become a separate page (for readability of the final CoC), but
is being drafted on the same page with the rest.
This includes both the intro section, and all the sub-sections, which
means everything that starts with "2." in the ToC. Currently this is
"Handling reports", "Responses and resolutions", and "Appealing a
resolution". However, the sections within "Cases" may change:
* Section:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Draft#Page:_Code_of_conduct_…
* Talk:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft#Finishing_the_Cas…
* Alternatively, you can provide anonymous feedback to
conduct-discussion(a)wikimedia.org .
This is the best time to make any necessary changes to this page (and
explain why, in edit summaries and/or talk) and discuss it on the talk page.
Other updates:
* The text of the "Report a problem" section has been frozen. Thanks to
everyone who helped discuss and edit these sections. Participation
(including both named and anonymous) helped us improve the
confidentiality line.
Thanks,
Matt Flaschen
No public goals yet please. Let's get internal agreement first. Step by
step.
-Toby
On Tuesday, November 10, 2015, Wes Moran <wmoran(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2015-16_Q2_Goals#Readi…
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Dan Garry <dgarry(a)wikimedia.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dgarry(a)wikimedia.org');>> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the updates!
>>
>> From a process perspective, I'd ask that you post your goals to the public
>> goals page
>> <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2015-16_Q2_Goals>,
>> as it's the centralised place where we keep all goals.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>> On 10 November 2015 at 09:43, May Tee-Galloway <mgalloway(a)wikimedia.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mgalloway(a)wikimedia.org');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> We want to post an update on the progress on UI standardization’s Q2
>>> goals.
>>>
>>> Late last week we were able to collect most of your team priorities so
>>> we, the UI Standardization team, can better sync efforts to
>>> collectively achieve UI consistency with other teams. We’ve started
>>> with Reading, Editing and Search/Discovery. Through learnings from
>>> more conversations, we then reached out to several teams across the
>>> foundation that produce front-end user interfaces. These priorities
>>> are documented here:
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/spreadsheets/d/163SxJchYcDozOwjkzBs…
>>>
>>> We are still in the process of gathering feedback from more community
>>> members, Community Resources, and Design Research teams. The timing
>>> hasn’t been ideal, but I am very happy to see this many participation
>>> from relevant parties as a start from the *entire* foundation. We are
>>> learning to better join forces and we are learning fast. Hence, going
>>> forward in the next quarters to come, we want to make it a point to
>>> better integrate teams and community members that do similar work and
>>> care about this matter.
>>>
>>> It's well into mid Q2 now, our scope for Q2 will be smaller, but
>>> nonetheless productive and impactful. For the remaining quarter, we
>>> will be prioritizing on these efforts:
>>> 1- Basic styles implemented with CSS and accompanying HTML
>>> 2- Style Guide - Guide on how and when to use UI components
>>> 3- Improve accessibility of our interface (Vector, OOjs UI, MediaWiki UI)
>>>
>>> There will be list of FAQ on our MediaWiki page
>>> (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_User_Interface) in the next
>>> couple of days on how we came to prioritize these requests with your
>>> help. We will also be sharing the estimated timelines for these said
>>> top priorities within this week.
>>>
>>> We will be posting more on the public design list so our community can
>>> be in the loop and have weight even at goal settings. I hope to see
>>> further design-related topics be brought up in the same channel as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> So, stay tuned! More updates to come.
>>>
>>> May & Volker
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dan Garry
>> Lead Product Manager, Discovery
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>
>
* Does some user interface have small design issues?
* Do you have some tasks that welcome some design research?
* Do your old bugs welcome some testing?
* Does your documentation need improvements?
* Do you have small, self-contained, "easy" bugs you'd love to get fixed?
(Also see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Annoying_little_bugs )
Google Code-In (GCI) will take place again in Dec+Jan: a contest for
13-17 year old students to provide small contributions to free software
projects.
Wikimedia will apply again to take part in GCI. The more tasks we can
offer the likelier the changes Wikimedia will get accepted.
Unsure about quality of contributions and effort?
Read about tgr's post about Multimedia achievements in GCI 2014:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/multimedia/2015-January/001009.html
In short:
* Add the project "GCI2015" + a comment to Phabricator tasks you'd mentor.
* Tasks are welcome in five areas: Code; Outreach/Research;
Documentation/Training; Quality Assurance; User Interface.
* Make sure the task description provides pointers to help the student.
* Add yourself to the table of mentors on the wikipage.
* "Beginner tasks" (<30 min for an experienced contributor) also welcome.
* "Generic" tasks also welcome (e.g. "Fix two user interface messages from
the "Blocked By" list in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T40638 ").
For all information, check
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Code-in_2015#Mentors.27_corner
27 "easy" Design tasks (are they still valid? are there more?):
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/ePvtv_ahPMrx/#R
Can you imagine providing a helping hand to someone fixing tasks?
Please ask if you have questions!
Thank you!
andre
--
Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
From time to time I see references to the 'design team' on lists and on
phabricator. But what does this really mean now? As I understood it, the
previous monolithic Design Team was essentially disbanded toward the
beginning of the year, with the designers themselves distributed amongst
the other WMF teams in order to more directly integrate their services
into the development workflow (which sounds like a pretty good idea to
me, at least, since design is such an integral part of most
development). Did this happen? According to
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors, there seem
to still be two teams now with the word 'design' in their names, Reading
Design and Design Research, though these both seem to have somewhat more
specialised functions than just general design, namely Reading (sounds
like front-end non-interactive mw stuff, the visuals perhaps?) and Research.
So what is the 'design team'? Is it one of these, though the teams only
have 5 and 4 people on them, respectively? Is it just WMF designers in
general?
As much as this is also just a plea to please be more specific, if you
have an actual answer, or if you have been saying this, please, speak
up, share your experience and where you're coming from. As confusing as
it is, I suspect a discussion of what and why this has been going on
could also clear up quite a bit.
Thanks.
-I
Hello everyone,
We want to post an update on the progress on UI standardization’s Q2 goals.
Late last week we were able to collect most of your team priorities so
we, the UI Standardization team, can better sync efforts to
collectively achieve UI consistency with other teams. We’ve started
with Reading, Editing and Search/Discovery. Through learnings from
more conversations, we then reached out to several teams across the
foundation that produce front-end user interfaces. These priorities
are documented here:
https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/spreadsheets/d/163SxJchYcDozOwjkzBs…
We are still in the process of gathering feedback from more community
members, Community Resources, and Design Research teams. The timing
hasn’t been ideal, but I am very happy to see this many participation
from relevant parties as a start from the *entire* foundation. We are
learning to better join forces and we are learning fast. Hence, going
forward in the next quarters to come, we want to make it a point to
better integrate teams and community members that do similar work and
care about this matter.
It's well into mid Q2 now, our scope for Q2 will be smaller, but
nonetheless productive and impactful. For the remaining quarter, we
will be prioritizing on these efforts:
1- Basic styles implemented with CSS and accompanying HTML
2- Style Guide - Guide on how and when to use UI components
3- Improve accessibility of our interface (Vector, OOjs UI, MediaWiki UI)
There will be list of FAQ on our MediaWiki page
(https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_User_Interface) in the next
couple of days on how we came to prioritize these requests with your
help. We will also be sharing the estimated timelines for these said
top priorities within this week.
We will be posting more on the public design list so our community can
be in the loop and have weight even at goal settings. I hope to see
further design-related topics be brought up in the same channel as
well.
So, stay tuned! More updates to come.
May & Volker