I understand the desire to avoid playing favorites by directing users to a list of browsers rather than a single one, but I think that cuts against *both *the goals of doing this in the first place.
The first goal is to nudge users to upgrade from an insecure, less-capable browser to a modern one. But if we present them a list of 10 alternatives (or even 2), they're far more likely to get stuck in choice paralysis [1] and far less likely to actually do what we want and upgrade.
The second goal is to strengthen non-profit, open-web-focused browser makers by increasing their market share. As I see it, the best way to do this is to nudge all our users towards a single, high-quality browser which already has significant market share, rather than distributing them across many different browsers with tiny market shares.
I'd suggest that the best areas for debate are (1) whether these are good goals, (2) whether their benefits justify interrupting users' browsing, and (3) which single browser would be the best destination
Obviously, my answers are (1) yes, (2) yes, and (3) Firefox, but some will disagree :)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis
On 1 September 2017 at 12:15, zppix e megadev44s.mail@gmail.com wrote:
Why dont we link to an list of web browsers compatible with wmf projects and let the user decide
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 1, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:55 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
At least until a proper resource exists, just directing people to the latest Firefox is probably the most reasonable option (we certainly can't support the incumbent).
Is linking to Firefox and Chromium an option?
-Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l