https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70351

--- Comment #22 from Isarra <[email protected]> ---
Quiddity got a lot of it, I think.

(In reply to Matthew Flaschen from comment #19) 
> MediaWiki has never been fully backwards compatible with skins, AFAICT. 
> Every new release of MediaWiki can (and often does) add new HTML elements
> that can be skinned.

Apples and oranges. New html elements, even new styled things, normally have
very generic styles, if any, and do not require anything special of most skins.
Consider the screenplay extension Bartosz and I worked on: it adds a completely
new page layout, with its own styles and everything, but it stills works out of
the box on nearly every skin I tested it on because it only changes the things
it needs to (mainly text placement and font - everything else is inherited).
The only one that failed was BlueSky, which uses particularly large text and a
fixed-width, resulting in the lines not fitting in the page.

That's not the issue here. The breaking changes for skins are more along the
lines of backend refactorings that remove required functions, hard-coded styles
that can't be easily overridden, and deprecations of things that never got
replacements.

And that needs to stop.

In this case that the skin-specific styles now at least can be disabled is an
improvement, but that is still backwards: they shouldn't be enabled at all
unless the skin specifically wants them.

There are specific skins for which they are designed. There are many, many more
skins for which they were not designed for. Why do the many, many skins need to
manually disable something when the far fewer number could enable it, instead,
to the same effect and requiring much less overall effort?

Generic default styles would fix this, but they don't currently exist, so
having nothing by default really is the best solution at present.

> You have not proposed a concrete implementation of MW UI (other than none at
> all, which I am not convinced of) that you think core should ship with.

What does that even mean? How do you "propose a concrete implementation"?

If I had a working framework for styling form elements, I could probably create
some mocks of a more generic set of default styles, but as is I don't
understand what is going on with the backend for this at all.

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

Reply via email to