Hello,
I've posted the bug 6691 and it was (in my opinion unsubstantiatedly) closed twice as invalid while it is definitely not.
Here's the issue:
In "/skins-1.5/monobook/main.css" there's property assignment "text-transform: lowercase;" in ".portlet h5" selector. This assignment is wrong and does not have any sense or justification.
There are several cases, when users would like to have either capital or uppercase letters in headers of sections in sidebar. Two major cases are using of proper names (consider Wikipedia with capitals on one hand, but also cases like iPOD eg. with some uppercase letters wherever in the name on the other hand as well) and languages using capital letters (such as de or als for nouns, or other languages having habits to write headlines with capital letter(s)).
Default instalation of MediaWiki _should not_ have this kind of restrictions and _should not_ add unnecessary work - users _should not_ be pressurized to edit more files than really necessary. So if they want to change sidebar content, why should they have to change stylesheets?
I've also got feedback from some users who have been confused about this - they wrote something and it appeared in different way. Default installation of MediaWiki _should not_ be confusing.
Please remove that property assignment according to the reasons described above. It's better to have people to add features and properties instead of superfluously override them. If they will really _need_ to or _want_ to have everything lowercased (my point of view is this will be significant minority) they will change it. Please make it more user-friendly. Please give users the liberty to choose and do not impose such restrictions on them.
Thanks
Danny B.
Danny B. wrote:
I've posted the bug 6691 and it was (in my opinion unsubstantiatedly) closed twice as invalid while it is definitely not.
Here's the issue:
In "/skins-1.5/monobook/main.css" there's property assignment "text-transform: lowercase;" in ".portlet h5" selector. This assignment is wrong and does not have any sense or justification.
It's a visual style in the default MonoBook look.
As I explained to you several times, this can be overridden if you are customizing MonoBook. If you're making a different theme based on the same HTML, of course, you don't have to override it.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Danny B. wrote:
I've posted the bug 6691 and it was (in my opinion unsubstantiatedly) closed twice as invalid while it is definitely not.
Here's the issue:
In "/skins-1.5/monobook/main.css" there's property assignment "text-transform: lowercase;" in ".portlet h5" selector. This assignment is wrong and does not have any sense or justification.
It's a visual style in the default MonoBook look.
As I explained to you several times, this can be overridden if you are customizing MonoBook. If you're making a different theme based on the same HTML, of course, you don't have to override it.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
And as I explained to you several times (last time in the mail in this conference from which you cut it out and picked just first quater), overriding is wrong process and having default style which is pushing people to do unnecessary work is wrong too. There's absolutely _no rational reason_ to have that property in the global stylesheet, especially if it's inaccessible stylesheet from which it can't be simply deleted by users therefore it must be superfluously overriden. Again - no reason for keeping. It just adds more work for users.
Danny B.
As Brion said it is part of the visual style of that *particular theme*, you would be better off creating your own theme to look the way you want and trying to get it included with mediawiki.
Arthur arthur@assys.net -----Original Message-----
And as I explained to you several times (last time in the mail in this conference from which you cut it out and picked just first quater), overriding is wrong process and having default style which is pushing people to do unnecessary work is wrong too. There's absolutely _no rational reason_ to have that property in the global stylesheet, especially if it's inaccessible stylesheet from which it can't be simply deleted by users therefore it must be superfluously overriden. Again - no reason for keeping. It just adds more work for users.
Danny B. _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
I don't need to create new theme. I just wish to _correct_ one of the mistakes in the current monobook, since that property is a nonsense because of reasons described before which Brion cut out in his mail.
Monobook is default theme in default installation of MediaWiki. Default theme _should not_ be confusing and _should not_ pressurize people to do unnecessary work which current monobook with this property assignment actually does.
Danny B.
------------ Původní zpráva ------------ Od: Arthur Guy Arthur@assys.net Předmět: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Please remove the wrong property from globalmonobook stylesheet Datum: 17.7.2006 12:52:54
As Brion said it is part of the visual style of that *particular theme*, you would be better off creating your own theme to look the way you want and trying to get it included with mediawiki.
Arthur arthur@assys.net -----Original Message-----
And as I explained to you several times (last time in the mail in this conference from which you cut it out and picked just first quater), overriding is wrong process and having default style which is pushing people to do unnecessary work is wrong too. There's absolutely _no rational reason_ to have that property in the global stylesheet, especially if it's inaccessible stylesheet from which it can't be simply deleted by users therefore it must be superfluously overriden. Again - no reason for keeping. It just adds more work for users.
Danny B. _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
On 7/17/06, Danny B. Wikipedia.Danny.B@email.cz wrote:
I don't need to create new theme. I just wish to _correct_ one of the mistakes in the current monobook, since that property is a nonsense because of reasons described before which Brion cut out in his mail.
Sorry to disagree with you but it's not nonsense.
Monobook is default theme in default installation of MediaWiki. Default theme _should not_ be confusing and _should not_ pressurize people to do unnecessary work which current monobook with this property assignment actually does.
Monobook is the default theme for wikipedia and other wikimedia projects, which have made certain aesthetic decisions about style. If you don't like the style, you are free to create a new one. Many of us are perfectly happy with the style as it is, and/or are willing to make tweaks to suit ourselves.
Rick, did you read the list of reasons why it should not be there? It's not the question of _my feeling_. It's a question about _approach to users_ of MW. Keeping it there is same like you'd said to whoever "Don't you worry, you can have unsafe sex, because there are ways how to cure veneral diseases." Isn't better to prevent the cure? Isn't better to prevent superfluous overriding (= wasting the time to solve something which did not have to be solved if there was no limitation)? It's always better to remove the cause than to solve consequences. And on the other hand - if you said you are willing to make tweaks, so if you prefer lowercase, tweak it yourself, but don't push it to others. As I said, I'd bet that lowercase override would be used by significant minority. Default style should be in what-you-wrote-is-what-you-get manner - that's a basic principle of being user friendly. Please check the reasons I wrote before and tell me if you have any objection against them or if you have any rational reason of same weight to keep that property assignment.
Danny B.
PS: Disagreeing is your choice and I respect it as your opinion. There's no need to excuse. :-)
------------ Původní zpráva ------------ Od: Rick DeNatale rick.denatale@gmail.com Předmět: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Please remove the wrong property from globalmonobook stylesheet Datum: 17.7.2006 14:11:00
On 7/17/06, Danny B. Wikipedia.Danny.B@email.cz wrote:
I don't need to create new theme. I just wish to _correct_ one of the mistakes
in the current monobook, since that property is a nonsense because of reasons described before which Brion cut out in his mail.
Sorry to disagree with you but it's not nonsense.
Monobook is default theme in default installation of MediaWiki. Default theme
_should not_ be confusing and _should not_ pressurize people to do unnecessary work which current monobook with this property assignment actually does.
Monobook is the default theme for wikipedia and other wikimedia projects, which have made certain aesthetic decisions about style. If you don't like the style, you are free to create a new one. Many of us are perfectly happy with the style as it is, and/or are willing to make tweaks to suit ourselves.
-- Rick DeNatale
Visit the Project Mercury Wiki Site http://www.mercuryspacecraft.com/ _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
On 7/17/06, Danny B. Wikipedia.Danny.B@email.cz wrote:
Rick, did you read the list of reasons why it should not be there?
Yes, I did, and I read the bug report as well.
It's not the question of _my feeling_. It's a question about _approach to users_ of MW.
Brion's response is completely in line with an open source project like mediawiki.
While there are a lot of installations using mediawiki, and those users are happy with the software to whatever extent, keep in mind that the major user is the wikimedia foundation, and that major user foots the bill for the development of the software.
We users can try to influence the development team, but we have to keep in mind that our voice is proportional to how much we pay for it. So the needs of wikimedia outweigh whatever individual users might want.
For whatever reason, the mediawiki developers (most likely meeting the desires of wikimedia) explicitly chose to lowercase the items in the stylebar, and don't want to change it. But since it's open source any individual installer of mediawiki is free to make local changes.
Keeping it there is same like you'd said to whoever "Don't you worry, you can have unsafe sex, because there are ways how to cure veneral diseases." Isn't better to prevent the cure?
I'll skip responding to this rather lurid question.
Isn't better to prevent superfluous overriding (= wasting the time to solve > something which did not have to be solved if there was no limitation)?
It's not a limitation, it's a choice. The choice for the default was made by the developers, probably to ensure a consistent style for wikipedia and it's siblings.
To change the choice for yourself, change the stylesheet or make a new one, that's what stylesheets are for.
It's always better to remove the cause than to solve consequences. And > on the other hand - if you said you are willing to make tweaks, so if you prefer lowercase, tweak it yourself, but don't push it to others.
You can turn this argument around and see it as an attempt to push another style on wikipedia.
As I said, I'd bet that lowercase override would be used by significant minority. Default style should be in what-you-wrote-is-what-you-get manner - that's a basic principle of being user friendly. Please check the reasons I wrote before and tell me if you have any objection against them > or if you have any rational reason of same weight to keep that property assignment.
If a majority of users want the lowercase styling removed, they are deafeningly silent. Yours is the only voice clamoring for this change either in bugzilla, or here.
I'd say that the vast majority of users of the mediawiki software are happy with it as it is.
Yes, there are quite a few who frequent this group who make changes, and much more significant ones than you are asking for. But the vast majority of those folks simply live with keeping their extensions and tweaks under local control, and adapting them to new releases if they can't get them accepted into the main line of development. That's what tools like diff are for.
And in general, that's how open source projects work.
I was going to keep my mouth shut, but.......
Keeping it there is same like you'd said to whoever "Don't you
worry, you
can have unsafe sex, because there are ways how to cure veneral diseases." Isn't better to prevent the cure?
I'll skip responding to this rather lurid question.
I won't - if the one little piece of the entire puzzle is a small change in a stylesheet, then your analogy really should be if venereal disease is a potential problem - do have sex. In other words you don't like the stylesheet - don't use the software. I expect your caterwaulerin' ain't gonna' drum up much bidness or e'en support. The fix is simple and easy and even recommended, as in - as nice as Wikipedia (it's it siblings, second cousins, foreign relations et al) is/are - do you really want your site to be "exactly" like them? Show a little initiative and change your corner of the world - go wild - change a style sheet (or two) - in fact use web-unsafe colours, odd point sizes and horizontal rules (eh strike the last one,,,,). It's your site, or even your employer's site - make it sing, make it dance - make it your own.
Isn't better to prevent superfluous overriding (= wasting the time
to solve > something which did not have to be solved if there was no limitation)?
There are always limitations and there are always choices. Decide for yourself what works for you and as the ad men say - "just do it". Just because it works for you does not mean it works for everyone else. Just imagine your contributions as a pair of shoes - they are functional and useful, but they don't fit everyone. Furthermore there will always be at least one person who thinks they stink.
I'd say that the vast majority of users of the mediawiki software are happy with it as it is.
Yes and one of the things that makes it so useful and me so happy if that with a small investment of time and thought, I can get the same code base to look way different as I design a corporate portal for a techgroup , an online tutorial for high-school trig and a vanity site full of odd perversions of CSS and HTML design standards. Your dream, you do it. Share it, but don't claim to the world that your dream is better - people get testy about that sorta' thang!
'nuff said, but I'm sure there will be more.
r
Ron Hall wrote:
I was going to keep my mouth shut, but.......
Keeping it there is same like you'd said to whoever "Don't you
worry, you
can have unsafe sex, because there are ways how to cure veneral diseases." Isn't better to prevent the cure?
I'll skip responding to this rather lurid question.
I won't - if the one little piece of the entire puzzle is a smallchange in a stylesheet, then your analogy really should be if venereal disease is a potential problem - do have sex. In other
A copy editor I is not today - read don't instead of do for the having sex part.
Dang.
r
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org