On 28 January 2013 21:59, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com> wrote: If we detect a wide screen (I have a 1920x1200 at work), going at least two-column would definitely be a good idea. Is anyone working on responsiveness in Vector? - d.

On 28 January 2013 22:17, stevertigo <stvrtg(a)gmail.com> wrote: Trouble there is that newspapers are portrait and have pages, but screens are usually landscape and (the important bit) stretch indefinitely vertically. A good example of the problem with doing it like a newspaper is https://sites.google.com/site/sophieinnorthkorea/ - brilliant article, but on a laptop screen the layout is just really confusing. - d.

Newspaper columns are not all of uniform size. Layout editors choose one width from within a certain readable range of column widths. Different stories may be of different widths, but a particular story will keep to the same width, as different widths would look strange. Of course if a story jumps to another page, it can have a different width. On the web the same principle applies that columns of text which are too narrow (when pinched by photos etc) or too wide (single column on a wide screen with browser at full width) then its probably going to make readers unhappy. -S On Jan 28, 2013 4:27 PM, "Steve Bennett" <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 29 January 2013 12:10, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: I found my way to the designer's website and emailed him about the redesigns page and this thread. He says thank you :-) - d.

Hey, that works :) I put it on userstyles.org. So if you use the "Stylish" plugin for Chrome or Firefox, you can add it here: http://userstyles.org/styles/82333/wikipedia-3-columns-magnus-manske Steve On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

Thanks! I'll be fiddling with it some more; now that TOC and thumbnails are in separate columns, they don't really need the grey background etc. Also, help would be appreciated; for example, I can't figure out how to top-align the TOC (position:absolute) and have it "bump down" left-side thumbnails (position:relative) at the same time. On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 1/30/13 1:41 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: I like it as well. Actually, I recall a previous version from Magnus that was sort of like this which I also liked; am I imagining that? The main issue with the present layout, imo, is that wrapping text around images produces clutter for no real gain when pages are so wide. I do like wrapping text around images on narrower pages, such as a typical book, or narrower portrait-format screens. In those cases, the alternatives feel inferior to me. Narrow columns really don't work for me: I use the IEEE and ACM 2-column article formats regularly in my day job and do not find them either aesthetically pleasing or particularly readable. And using a wider column without wrapping results in the image taking up the whole page for a certain amount of the vertical space, which is only sensible if it's a major object of discussion which should narratively fit into the text, rather than a side illustration. But at larger widths, you can put the side illustrations out in the margin, because there is tons of space. -Mark

On 1 February 2013 10:05, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com> wrote: Looks nice! Feels a bit visually busy ... maybe not being used to it. The "languages" dropdown seems a bit mystery-meat navigation to me - perhaps head it "Other languages" like the "Categories" dropdown next to it. This page appears to break it: https://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Factory%20Benelux%20discogra… - d.

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Yes, but it's sooooo elegant with pure CSS, and once I start adding JS, I'll keep adding code until it becomes self-aware ;-)

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Andrew Gray &lt;andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk&gt; wrote: So there are six interfaces. You expose the four most important ones this way, you make talk:edit a button or something that's part of the talk page itself, and you ignore talk:history. That's for nerds. (I'm not sure if I've ever looked at a talk page history. It's pretty rare.) In reality though, I think using tabs for actions is the wrong approach (and is after all what the old skin did). Buttons with standard glyphs, sparingly used, would work better. A big pencil button for "edit", a less prominent "discuss this" button for talk, with history squirrelled away somewhere. You don't need a view button - standard behaviour would be to have something like a clickable page title or a "<- Roman Empire" link on those other pages. Mmmm...dunno about strange. Lots of blogs etc have wide margins. Or they could remain full-width. That'd only be a problem if the article was short but had long right-hand-side infoboxes. You could deal with that by making the infobox column scrollable. Minor detail. It'd be great to have some cues that show which of the interwiki links have significant amounts of content (especially any with more content than the one you're looking at). Steve