On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 05:07:11PM -0700, Fabrice Florin wrote:
A. Simple 'Edit? button: (5)
Provide an ?Edit? tool above the fold, so that advanced users can quickly go to the Commons description page to edit it. Restrict this to logged-in users only?
? Pros: gives editors a much-needed edit tool, in a compact format that is easy to understand (pencil icon), making it easier for them to do their work
? Cons: readers could get confused by this tool, which takes them to a completely different site (so we may want to not show it to them at all).
One thing I'm not totally clear on - is this a link to the edit page,
or to the description page? The former would be hard technically, but
the latter would be less useful for power users (maybe?)
This link would go to the file description page, as described above — not the edit page with wikitext, which would be overwhelming for most users.
Even a power user can get more value from seeing the description page first, so they have more context.
The pencil icon is intended here as a metaphor to let you know that if you want to edit this file’s information, you have to go to its file repository.
Someday, we may be able to edit fields directly in the Media Viewer, but it seems best to wait until we have implemented structured data on Commons. :)
C. 'More details on Commons?: (7)
Provide a call to action inviting new users to check more details on Commons, explaining what it is and how to get there. Shown below the fold, after key details.
? Pros: Clarifies what Commons is and why users might want to go there: to get more details and share free media. Larger panel makes it easier to find.
? Cons: Below the fold position means many users will not see it. Consider using it in combination with Options A or B above?
The problem I have with this is that it's really Commons centric. I have
seen enough Commons-centric crap go into UploadWizard that I'm really
cautious about this now, and this smells funny to me.
In particular, the text that is in the mockup doesn't seem to come from
anywhere API-accessible, so we would either need to add another field to
the siteinfo API ("subtitle for this wiki on remote sites using it as a
repository for images..." verbose) or hard-code it in for Commons (see
above), which both sound unappealing.
--
Mark Holmquist
Software Engineer, Multimedia
Wikimedia Foundation
mtraceur@member.fsf.org
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:MHolmquist
Thanks, Jean-Fréderic!
If it is too inconvenient to provide this subtitle for each file repository, we could either leave the second line blank, or use the same generic phrase already used by that site, like:
‘More details on English Wikipedia
The free encyclopedia'
But I think that Pau’s proposal addresses effectively some of the concerns that he heard from users during this recent usability study, with key findings summarized below:
• Access to Commons. It is not clear how to get more metadata. Even for users that appreciate detailed EXIF metadata, “Learn more on commons” link was not communicating that they could get this information. Some users figured out that the license link was leading to the details page, but that was a confusing experience.
• A more clear call to action to view more details is needed (
example). The details page and the media viewer overlap in content needs to be clarified for the user (we can even label this as “more technical details” to reinforce the different purpose of both).
So I think it’s worth it to go the extra mile to try to explain this link a bit more.
_______________________________________________
Multimedia mailing list
Multimedia@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/multimedia
