Possibly I misunderstood? You wrote, "I think we can kill the in-line TOC" which I interpreted to mean: you suggest removing the ToC that currently appears in all articles (with more than 3 sections), in favour of *just* a drop-down menu ToC.
This would be a problem because articles are intended to have clear and insightful ToCs, that appear near the top, and provide mental structure (for the reader) for what follows, as well as instant navigation to lower sections. Eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._2_Operational_Conversion_Unit_RAAF or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_%28constellation%29 (two recent FAs) Eg2. I'll often go to a musician's article, read the intro/infobox, and then click the "Discography" link in the ToC.
Additionally, people tend to not find hidden things. If the ToCs are only available in hidden form (an icon), most readers will never *ever* see them.
I like the current Winter setup, which has the ToC-icon in the fixed-header, and the ToC-icon within the in-line ToC.
I'm curious about the potential for placing the ToC into the lefthand sidebar, once the user scrolls down. (Like a PDF ToC)
Quiddity.
On 14-01-21 04:03 PM, Jared Zimmerman wrote:
not sure I follow…
Moving the TOC doesn't affect its structure…
Change the process for getting to a subheading, from 1-move-and-click to 2-moves-and-2-clicks I assume by 1-move you mean, scroll past the lead paragraph, then click on a section of the toc?
in the prototype, you click (or we could make it hover) which would mean no moves, 1 click, so faster than the current state of things, also we get the bonus of it being available anywhere, not just at the top of an article.
*Jared Zimmerman *\Director of User Experience \Wikimedia Foundation M : +1 415 609 4043 | : @JaredZimmerman https://twitter.com/JaredZimmerman
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:45 PM, quiddity <pandiculation@gmail.com mailto:pandiculation@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Jared Zimmerman <jared.zimmerman@wikimedia.org <mailto:jared.zimmerman@wikimedia.org>> wrote: Looking good, some feedback… * I think we should explore putting Watch and TOC together, or at least associating them more closely. * tipsy being to the left of, covers the other icons, I'm not sure if we even need it, perhaps we could just rely on regular browser tooltips. * I think that moving the TOC icon over should be animated, currently the snap makes me look up, and is a bit distracting, the opposite of what we want. * I think we can kill the in-line TOC That would be problematic. It would: * Make it impossible to get a sense of the article structure, at a glance. (eg. Enwiki's WP:Features article criteria 2b <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FA%3F> and any good FA example.) * Change the process for getting to a subheading, from 1-move-and-click to 2-moves-and-2-clicks * You can't currently scroll the TOC flyout * Idea : highlight the current section in the TOC flyout * when language list is not collapsable the left sidebar take a long time to go away Pau's proposal should solve that. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Beta_Features/New_Features#Better_Interlanguage_Links * Placeholder text and user input is not aligned with each other in search box * * * * *Jared Zimmerman *\\Director of User Experience \\Wikimedia Foundation M : +1 415 609 4043 <tel:%2B1%C2%A0415%20609%204043> | : @JaredZimmerman <https://twitter.com/JaredZimmerman> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:11 PM, May Tee-Galloway <mgalloway@wikimedia.org <mailto:mgalloway@wikimedia.org>> wrote: Added my comments on mediawiki. @Steven: No matter how much anyone doesn't like the globe including myself, it's a huge part of Wikipedia's brand like you mentioned and shouldn't be wiped out just for the sake of our personal preference. We should improve and not trash it. Even if we trashed it and replaced with something else, we still need SOMETHING people can relate to in regards to the project. Why do this when people already relate the globe as Wikipedia. Wabi sabi wasabi man. mm On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org <mailto:swalling@wikimedia.org>> wrote: On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Brandon Harris <bharris@wikimedia.org <mailto:bharris@wikimedia.org>> wrote: Hello! I’ve been making a thing. It’s actually got a code-name now! No more saying “Vector static header and navigation modification”. LOTS of stuff going on with this update. Notably: * Now asks for a username on load, so as to set things up * All pages are loaded from the API via JSON. So it’s not just the single static page. * Got rid of pretty much every color. * Article actions now dock in the header as you scroll. * Table of Contents is now in the header from the beginning * The sidebar’s border goes away as you scroll past it * Lots of links/actions do what you think they should. Most do not. You can play with it here: http://unicorn.wmflabs.org/winter/ And read more about it here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Winter \o/ The search prototype is great, and so are the improvements to the toolbar, particularly the relation between the TOC and the way the page actions slide out on scrolldown. I can't wait to see this as a beta feature. Some very small things: - I realize the icons are mostly placeholders, but the user contribs one is seriously confusing. It looks like there are two edit buttons when you scroll down. - I think the main edit button at the top should not be the quiet state from mw-ui. There is very little use of color on the skin now, so it's not like we're overwhelming things. We need to stop being afraid to make a few things LOUDER, particularly since in this prototype we're removing some color (like the Vector borders). - The line underneath the page title h1 is a different thickness (and color?) than the other borders. It's mildly annoying. And one bigger thing... The lack of the puzzle globe when scrolling. I know you hate the puzzle globe and so do many of our designers. But it's a key part of our identity, and it's also a really nice large target for "home" on desktop. Thinking of this as a potential future default look, splitting the logo and wordmark on every page like that is a serious change. We should have a larger conversation about it I think internally. Either we do think the globe is an important part of our brand or we don't. If we think it's so unimportant as to remove it on scroll, then that has pretty wide implications for our branding I think. Winter is coming, (I couldn't resist the Game of Thrones reference.) -- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/ _______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design _______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design _______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design