Firefox, IE, and Opera all seem to have Print Preview capabilities, is that inadequate for your needs?
I'd personally prefer to not clutter up Monobook with things like a print icon or other text.
regards, -Nick
JT.Thomas@VerizonWireless.com wrote:
One thing to consider,
I find that the 'printable view' is useful for things *other* than printing
- i.e. screen captures. I find the omission of this function from the
monobook skin to be regretable.
Of course admins and poweruser's can be informed to switch skins, but the casual user is unlikely to make the distinction. Of course the installation can be modified to use an alternate skin as the default - but monobook is *much more* attractive IMHO.
Best Regards,
JT
=== You said: ===
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 20:06:02 +0100 From: Rowan Collins rowan.collins@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Printable Version? To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list mediawiki-l@wikimedia.org Message-ID: 9f02ca4c040914120612a6cc7a@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Paul Johnson baloo@ursine.dyndns.org wrote:
OK, for my next dumb question ~ Does anyone know what and how to hack my wiki to show a "printable
version"
option on my pages in monobook?
I thought that was called the "classic" skin. Am I wrong?
The Classic skin, I believe, had/has a link to a special "Print Version" of each article. The MonoBook skin, by using CSS, simply tells the browser to print the page differently than it displays it. This is of course rather more "magic" than most users expect...