Including:
"I’m starting to think it would be good for us to organise a sprint on this
very topic, get the multimedia team, relevant Ops people and some other
interested developers from other teams and really dive into these problems."
Sumana Harihareswara
Senior Technical Writer
Wikimedia Foundation
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 11:58 AM, C. Scott Ananian <cananian(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Another means to accomplish the same goal (more
standardized thumbnail
sizes) are the "semantics markup for images" proposals mooted about
(but not yet formalized, I don't think). The idea would be to
strongly encourage authors to use more-semantic markup, and give more
authority to the renderer (responsive theme, pdf, etc) to choose an
appropriate image size and layout. Articles just Look Better if the
images are scaled to consistent sizes.
--scott
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Gilles Dubuc <gilles(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I would be in favor of waiting to see if the
ongoing work described by
Gergo is sufficient to address Ops' issues before doing something with
the
thumbnail size standardization RfC. It came to be
due to operational
costs,
but if thumbnail rendering becomes a lot faster
(thanks to bucketing, for
example), it might not be necessary to standardize image sizes anymore.
And
if it is, I would rather start a new RfC with a
narrower proposition.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Sumana Harihareswara <
sumanah(a)wikimedia.org
wrote:
> I asked some folks about
>
>
>
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Standardized_thumbnails…
> .
> Antoine, the original author, said on the talk page:
>
> "We had several mailing list discussion in 2012 / beginning of 2013
> regarding optimizing the thumbnails rendering. That RFC is merely a
summary
> of the discussions and is intended to avoid
repeating ourself on each
> discussion. I am not leading the RFC by any mean, would be nice to have
the
> new multimedia team to take leadership
there."
>
> Gergo of the multimedia team has a question about whether he should
start
> a new RfC, and a question for Ops (below),
which he said I could
forward to
> this list, so I'm doing so. :-)
>
> If we can settle this onlist, cool. Otherwise I'll be setting up an IRC
> chat for later this week.
>
>
> Sumana Harihareswara
> Senior Technical Writer
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Gergo Tisza <gtisza(a)wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Sumana!
>>
>> We are working on some form of standardized thumbnail sizes, but it is
>> not exactly the same issue that is discussed in the RfC
>> <
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Standardized_thumbnails…
>> .
>>
>> The problem we have ran into is that MediaViewer fits the image size to
>> the browser window size (which means a huge variety of image sizes even
>> when the browser window is fully enlarged, and practically infinite
>> otherwise),
>> but thumbnail rendering is very slow and waiting for it would result
in a
>> crappy user experience. We started using
a list of standardized
thumbnail
>> sizes, so that MediaViewer always
requests one of these sizes from the
>> browser and rescales them with CSS, but even so the delay remains
>> problematic for the first user who requests the image with a given
bucket.
>> To address that, we are working with ops
towards automatically
rendering
>> the thumbnails in those sizes as soon as
the image is uploaded.
>>
>> Another possibility related to standardized thumbnail sizes that we are
>> exploring is to speed up the thumbnail generation for large images by
>> having a list of sizes for which the thumbnail is pregenerated and
always
>> present, and resize one of those
thumbnails instead of the original to
>> generate the size requested by the user. The goal of this would be to
avoid
>> overloading the scalers when several
large images need to be
thumbnailed at
>> the same time (GWToolset caused outages
this way on a few occasions).
>>
>> I can create an RfC about one or both of the above issues if there is
>> interest in wider discussion. I don't know whether the current
thumbnail
>> size standardization RfC should be
replaced with those, though; its
goals
>> are not stated, but seem to be mainly
operations concerns (how to make
sure
>> thumbnails don't take up too much
storage space). Maybe ops wants to
take
>> it over, or provide clearer goals in that
regard for the multimedia
team to
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
(
http://cscott.net)