gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Thu Feb 7 15:58:24 UTC 2008
The modern skin may be nice and clear, but it is not what we serve to our
customers. When people test new functionality, it is tested against the
ubiquitous monobook skin and I do know that some of the skins are broken
with some of the later extensions. I do not have nor take the time for this.
I am used to monobook, it is functional for me, but the whole experience can
be improved. I find it really funny that this is a website abour skin and
that for me the best bit is its skin.
On Feb 7, 2008 4:48 PM, Bryan Tong Minh <bryan.tongminh at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2008 2:46 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > attractive package. It is easy to argue that without it they will not do
> > well, it is as easy to argue that with a cleaner/less cluttered skin we
> > would do better.
> > It has been said in the past that a new skin would be a good thing.
> > arguments are as good as ever.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> Have you looked at the modern skin? It is a nice clear skin.
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
More information about the foundation-l