James Forrester <> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |,
                   |                            |,
                   |                            |

--- Comment #1 from James Forrester <> ---
(In reply to C. Scott Ananian from comment #0)
> says:
> > An image with frame always ignores the size specification, the original 
> > image
> > will be reduced if it exceeds the maximum size defined in user preferences.
> However, as bug 53514 describes, the actual behavior seems to have regressed
> at some point.  The code in includes/Linker.php to check the user preference
> for size (which seems to be the same as the thumbnail size preference) is
> unreachable.  As presently written, framed images are always rendered at
> their "natural" size, *unless a height* is specified, in which case the
> height is honored (and the width, if any, ignored).
> It's not entirely clear what the proper fix should be.  There are three
> options:
> 1. Leave the code as is, and update the spec on the wiki.
> 2. If a height is specified, honor the height *and* width (conservative,
> should change few pages)
> 3. Implement what I think was the original idea: *always* ignore the width
> and height, and limit the maximum image size with the user's thumbnail size
> preference.

I think option 2 is best; option 3 would be quite disruptive given that I think
this is how it's been for a while (getting out git blame here might be
interesting), so people aren't expecting this fundamental a thing to change
much. We should talk to the Multimedia team a bit here to check with them,

However, MediaWiki's image system needs some serious review, and I don't think
a bug is the place to do it. Some possible questions, just to illustrate:

*Why* does a frame image work like a thumb image except for the thumbnail and
the magnifying glass icon?

*Why* does frameless not operate like frame with respect to size, but does for
everything else? (Though that might be just this bug, I guess?)

*Why* are galleries fundamentally different in options and some of the new
gallery options like hover-caption aren't implemented?

Given that the proposed changes to Vector (but not Monobook, and not MediaWiki
core?) in Typography Update remove the frame from frame and thumb images,
should those options be merged? Should the wikitext for "thumb" be killed off?
Should |border=1 still work in these cases? Why?

… etc.

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

Reply via email to