On 01/04/2014 05:11 PM, Steven Walling wrote:

This is riskier and bigger change, but it's what people seemed to want
back in the day, when we first started rolling out mw.ui styles in core
for login/signup etc.

The main risk is just that someone uses the wrong class, or misses one, so it's (more) inconsistent or looks a little weird.  The risk of making it unusable is much lower.

The requirement for doing this is that we are /much more diligent/ about

doing a design review of every interface this patch touches and looking
for major flaws that would impair use. If we're going to move forward
with that patch, I want us to not push this out hastily. Let's make a
checklist for design review to work through systematically on Beta Labs
and also perhaps a separate Labs instance.

Probably, a separate one would make more sense, since it has to be in master to make Beta Labs, which means it will be deployed in a few days.

Matt/Juliusz/anyone: is applying mw.ui to HTMLForm *required* to
merge 52169 and apply the buttons to EditPage, History, Logs, etc.?

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/52169 could potentially exclude HTMLForm (as a way to split the patch), though it should be noted that HTMLForm already has an opt-in vform option.

I am thinking maybe it might be good to break the HTMLForm work in to a
separate and simultaneous patch, just because the design audit required
seems much more varied for HTMLForm than edit, history, logs, revdelete,
and so on. Just an idea.

That's reasonable to think about.  I posted on the patch.

Matt Flaschen

_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
Design@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design