On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Magnus Manske wrote:
I would
actually suggest that we try somehow to change the "look and feel"
of the special namespaces, so that people will just SEE the distinction as
they browse through our site.
I think that's what is bugging me about the "()", in a way. Talk pages
are not just a variant of encyclopedia articles, they're something
else entirely, even though they use the same interface and syntax. The
hardwired ":" character makes a clear distinction between the pages
types, while "()" does not. There are already some articles with
"()"
in the name, and I'm afraid the talk, wikipedia and user pages would
blend into each other again if we stop using the ":".
Yes! So Mark is right, here: the other namespaces need some different
sort of look and feel. Different background colors, anyway, something
like that.
I agree that the special namespaces should be
distingushed more from
the encyclopedia pages. Again, this is more a layout problem than
anything else. How about marking the namespace part of the title in
red, of italics?
The namespace part of the URL doesn't have to appear in the title at all
(as it doesn't for special: pages--odd); in fact, probably shouldn't since
it's so ugly. But maybe there should be some indication on the page of
how to link to the page, perhaps just below the title. Maybe something
like this:
[=+[=+Talk section+=]+=] <-- This is a distinctive talk section header
Philosophy <-- page name
(link to this page with <aColor>[[talk:Philosophy]]</aColor>) <--notice
The namespace display should also be updated. The link
to the Talk namespace
should probably get a special position, or an icon or something.
Yes, clearly some special treatment. One shouldn't need to know that, in
order to talk about an article, one should click on the "Talk" link (the
reader might well say: "Gee, is that a link or cryptic green colored
text?") that follows "Other namespaces" ("What the hell is a
namespace?
Nothing I'd be interested in, because I don't even know what 'namespace'
means.")
I think Larry agrees with me that hardwireing is a
*good* thing to sepetate
the actual articles from the "surrounding" pages. That was *one* of the
reasons we made
meta.wikipedia.com, right?
Right! As I said when it was being made, I wouldn't be entirely averse to
there being a meta: namespace--as long as the meta: namespace had a
separate Recent Changes page.
Larry