https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71621
--- Comment #9 from Krinkle <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #7) > (In reply to Krinkle from comment #5) > > This would result in loading only part of a module, which is in my opinion > > against expectations. > > We already serve only the CSS of the module to no-JS users, so it's not > totally against expectations. > No we don't. Only for exceptional modules that are designed specifically to be a base module without javascript, loaded explicitly via addModuleStyles, thus bypassing ResourceLoader. If you're loading a regular module containing javascript files via addModuleStyles, you're doing it wrong. It doesn't throw an exception for that right now, but we should if that helps. When writing css rules in a stylesheet loaded by ResourceLoader one should be able to assume javascript execution alongside of it. (In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #7) > Those might be reasonable changes for the future, but I don't think it's > okay to do such a major change without proper notice/release notes, and > definitely not appropriate to do in a security patch. I agree. But on the other hand one could also argue we never supported this in the first place. The community never asked to make usability and design decisions for the software interface. And contrary to the usual case, it's actually smaller wikis that do this, not the larger language editions of Wikipedia. Which I suspect might be due to lack of peer review and a wider audience to notice the (possibly negative) impact of a such a change. I'm not arguing that though. It's been too years since Common.css was added and these wikis started doing it to take it back now. Should the community ask for a feature if there's an existing exploit they can use to emulate a requested feature? (e.g. if Common.css was limited to content area and content pages, this would never be possible and we'd have to consider it as an actual feature, which we probably wouldn't allow for good reasons on WMF. The intent to improve the interface is completely valid however and we'd actively help those wikis improve their interface from the software perspective instead, it's merely about the implementation details here, not about the actual visual changes to interface). -- 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 [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
