I've bumped up the font size on headings a *small* amount: enough to make the page title actually look like a page title again.
It's in CVS -- could someone put it on the test server? After that, I'll put the body colour in CSS & make the relevant PHP change. After *that*, I'll see about slowly tweaking the current skin. We need to look a bit smarter in time for the 300k article announcement. What were people's impressions of the Montparnasse skin debate? Did it reach consensus at all?
BTW, a few weeks ago it was disucssed that several people would be granted server access. the main motivation being that it was a cheaper solution than paying the Raelians to clone Brion ;) any word on this?
tarquin tarquin@planetunreal.com wrote in news:3F33B155.9030103@planetunreal.com:
[cut]
change. After *that*, I'll see about slowly tweaking the current skin. We need to look a bit smarter in time for the 300k article announcement.
[cut]
The current default skin gives to non-technical visitors a bad impression. The find it looks old and not proffesional.
I like the idea of very basic default look. But not al visitors do.
A option where a visitor can choose a skin can improve the way a visitor looks at wikipedia.
The wikipedia in a nice skin also looks better on television; http://www.ict-id.nl/wikipedia/html/wikipedia_index.html http://www22.brinkster.com/rotemdan/phase4-demo-v1-1.htm
Walter Vermeir wrote:
tarquin wrote
After *that*, I'll see about slowly tweaking the current skin. We need to look a bit smarter in time for the 300k article announcement.
The current default skin gives to non-technical visitors a bad impression. The find it looks old and not proffesional.
But we're not professional! Let's not pretend that we are. A bit of amateurish isn't bad if it leaves people with the feeling that we are closer to the non-technical person's level of computer understanding. We want people to contribute without being blinded by glitz. The contents are far more important than the skin.
I like the idea of very basic default look. But not al visitors do.
A option where a visitor can choose a skin can improve the way a visitor looks at wikipedia.
There is something fundamentally illogical about this. For a visitor to be able to change the skin he needs to know something about our "preferences". By the time he knows enough to make that change he is no longer just a visitor
The wikipedia in a nice skin also looks better on television; http://www.ict-id.nl/wikipedia/html/wikipedia_index.html http://www22.brinkster.com/rotemdan/phase4-demo-v1-1.htm
These are very nice. :-P We can have as many optional skins as we want.
Eclecticology
Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote in news:3F33EFAA.7060803@telus.net:
Walter Vermeir wrote:
tarquin wrote
A option where a visitor can choose a skin can improve the way a visitor looks at wikipedia.
There is something fundamentally illogical about this. For a visitor to be able to change the skin he needs to know something about our "preferences". By the time he knows enough to make that change he is no longer just a visitor
That is the point. To provide a option, like a pulldown menu, on the mainpage where you can select a skin whitout the need to make a account. It is not logical that a reader needs to make a account to be abel to do this.
Or a url that can be used to select a skin for a visitor. So there is no need for a menu on all wikipedia's a and those who like it can put a "select a skin" on the page.
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Walter Vermeir wrote:
tarquin wrote
After *that*, I'll see about slowly tweaking the current skin. We need to look a bit smarter in time for the 300k article announcement.
The current default skin gives to non-technical visitors a bad impression. The find it looks old and not proffesional.
But we're not professional! Let's not pretend that we are. A bit of amateurish isn't bad if it leaves people with the feeling that we are closer to the non-technical person's level of computer understanding. We want people to contribute without being blinded by glitz. The contents are far more important than the skin.
Yes! But I want people to be blinded by *neither* 1) glitz nor 2) yucky skins with too many techy-looking links My aim for the default skin is simplicity and clarity.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org