On 5 June 2010 01:03, Howie Fung hfung@wikimedia.org wrote:
First, some background on the problem we're addressing and the design principle that we used. Every situation is unique, but in the case of the interwikilinks, we believe the sheer number of language links, especially within the context of an information-heavy page, makes users "numb" to the list. When people see large collections of things, they tend to group them all together as one object and not identify the individual parts that make the whole.
"We believe" = no data, then?
In a list of language links, people will immediately notice the one that they can read: their own language, i.e. the one they're looking for.
While we did not explicitly test for this during our usability studies (e.g., it wasn't included as a major design question), we did exercise judgement in identifying this as a problem, based partly on the applying the above design principle to the site, partly on the data.
You've just said it was on "judgement" and *not at all* on any data.
Thank you for your input.
This is implemented in each wiki's [[MediaWiki:vector.css]]. As such, if a wiki votes to reverse this interface change, and your proposed "compromise" solution - will they be able to do so, or will the Foundation impose the change upon them regardless? i.e., is this content control by the WMF? I ask based on the preremptory tone used by Trevor Parscal in reverting the original change.
- d.