By Hakon Wium Lie of Opera:
http://www.princexml.com/howcome/2009/wikipedia/infobox/
What is the likelihood of making as much as possible CSS? How to make infoboxes degrade gracefully for non-CSS browsers and IE users?
- d.
I don't know if making such an infobox that does not support IE6 and IE7 is a good idea. If you would take out all inline style elements and replace with them classes that are available in a general stylesheet it would already safe a lot of the cruft in the original code.
-- Hay
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
By Hakon Wium Lie of Opera:
http://www.princexml.com/howcome/2009/wikipedia/infobox/
What is the likelihood of making as much as possible CSS? How to make infoboxes degrade gracefully for non-CSS browsers and IE users?
- d.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
2009/3/3 Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com:
I don't know if making such an infobox that does not support IE6 and IE7 is a good idea. If you would take out all inline style elements and replace with them classes that are available in a general stylesheet it would already safe a lot of the cruft in the original code.
Well, yeah. I was wondering at that bit. Anything that doesn't incorporate a fair bit of backward compatibility (in this case, compatibility with the backward) isn't a happener. Note also that Hakon Wium Lie invented large amounts of CSS.
Nevertheless, the idea is worth consideration I think. The details would be painful though.
- d.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if making such an infobox that does not support IE6 and IE7 is a good idea.
It doesn't even support Firefox 2 . . . inline-block wasn't implemented in Gecko until 1.9 (Firefox 3).
Also: "It should be fairly easy to do so, as the HTML code is generated by templates." Has he *looked* at the templates? :)
The major reason why inline style is used on Wikipedia is, of course, because ordinary editors don't have the ability to use stylesheets. And while admins do, they can only effectively add markup to *all* pages at once, regardless of whether they contain the exact infobox in question. An awful lot of the provided CSS is nation-box-specific, and so useless in 99.99% of Wikipedia's articles. (Literally: there are about 2.7 million articles, and I'm pretty sure there are less than 270 recognized nations.) But all that CSS would have to be served with all of them.
Maybe it would be an idea to have some kind of fancy extension that adds classes for templates only if they are available on articles that need them? Actually, i'm not sure if its in their job description, but something that would make tables and infoboxes a lot simpler should be a task of the usability team.
-- Hay
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Aryeh Gregor Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if making such an infobox that does not support IE6 and IE7 is a good idea.
It doesn't even support Firefox 2 . . . inline-block wasn't implemented in Gecko until 1.9 (Firefox 3).
Also: "It should be fairly easy to do so, as the HTML code is generated by templates." Has he *looked* at the templates? :)
The major reason why inline style is used on Wikipedia is, of course, because ordinary editors don't have the ability to use stylesheets. And while admins do, they can only effectively add markup to *all* pages at once, regardless of whether they contain the exact infobox in question. An awful lot of the provided CSS is nation-box-specific, and so useless in 99.99% of Wikipedia's articles. (Literally: there are about 2.7 million articles, and I'm pretty sure there are less than 270 recognized nations.) But all that CSS would have to be served with all of them.
- Show quoted text -
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it would be an idea to have some kind of fancy extension that adds classes for templates only if they are available on articles that need them? Actually, i'm not sure if its in their job description, but something that would make tables and infoboxes a lot simpler should be a task of the usability team.
No, it shouldn't. Almost nobody actually has to edit infobox templates, so making that easier should be very low priority.
Also maybe there can be a way to not use <table> for page layout on Special Pages, https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17595 .
jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
Also maybe there can be a way to not use <table> for page layout on Special Pages, https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17595 .
In which bug you state:
"With the obsolete hardwired tables design, one cannot browse:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
or
1 2 3 4 5 6
or
1 2 3 4 "
I'd like to see the CSS/HTML that can do that without JS or something else. I'm not familiar with a technique to implement dynamically resizable columns in CSS/HTML.
Mike
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Michael Daly michael.daly@kayakwiki.org wrote:
I'd like to see the CSS/HTML that can do that without JS or something else. I'm not familiar with a technique to implement dynamically resizable columns in CSS/HTML.
That's what column-* is for. Of course, IE doesn't support it (including IE8). I sketched a couple of other possibilities I could think of on the bug, with their limitations. Inline-blocks would probably be feasible.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org