https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60304

--- Comment #29 from MZMcBride <b...@mzmcbride.com> ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> I am sad because of your remarks. They clearly assume that people have the
> power to install the fonts on the systems they use. Not necessarily true.

Sure.

> They assume that ULS is not universal ... it exists as an extension to Chrome
> and Firefox. That makes it as close as we can make it to the kind of universal
> you suggest ULS is not.

The fact that browser extensions exist is part of my point... fixing this at
the browser level is saner and should likely be more encouraged on our sites.
That said, the comments at bug 60327 were helpful to me in better understanding
some of the issues here. Apparently people rely on Wikimedia wikis to write on
other sites. If we can provide such a service, there's certainly value in that.

> All in all ULS is successful in what it aims to do. It may be improved upon
> but that does not negate its accomplishments.

Sure, but there's also a question of what value to users is provided given the
implementation costs (whether that's coding, designing the user interface,
making small tweaks, performance debugging, etc.). I personally think better
ULS usage statistics, and overall better messaging about the virtues of ULS,
would significantly help here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to