On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:33 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 9 April 2014 17:30, Brian Wolff
That said, we shouldn't be afraid of making
changes where we
reasonably think they might be a good idea, even without evidence they
actually are. You can't have data on everything. I just don't like
"Well we are undoubtedly making things better for the reader" used as
a counter argument to criticism when we simply don't know what it will
do for the average reader.
Yes, it is the sort of statement that probably should not be used
without being followed by a link to actual UI testing results.
I should follow up on this and say that no one working on the Beta Feature
thinks it's a good idea to try and design typography that only works for
people who aren't logged in/don't edit. The design goals listed at
pretty universal to all users, as they should be.
I don't really think that when it comes to typography, either type of
visitor to Wikimedia sites is more or less important when it comes to
listening to feedback. Even if Nathan was right, sometimes it's hard for us
to balance the two. What I said in reply to Risker is that I don't think
there saying the change is a failure is fair or true, based on the level
and kind of feedback we've been getting from both readers *and* editors.