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@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_sizes .
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 work towards.
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@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@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_sizes .
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 work towards.
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@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@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@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_sizes .
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 work towards.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Some additional discussion: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Talk:Requests_for_comment/Standardized... 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@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@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@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@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
work towards.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
-- (http://cscott.net)
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org