A skin does not have to change the content, most of the skin is chrome and can be changed without touching the content at all.
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:12 AM Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <nwil...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > Multiple responses: > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 10:07 AM Juergen Fenn <jf...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > Am 12.12.19 um 02:25 Uhr schrieb Strainu: > > > There is also a > > > question of opportunity: with less and less desktop users, it just > > > makes more sense to invest in the mobile experience > > > > Most authors still use desktop computers for writing articles or doing > > maintenance work. Mobile is for readers. > > > > That is true in most wikis, but not all, and it's a slowly growing > percentage. Some contributors only have a phone as their single (or > sometimes even just *shared*) access to the internet. Much of the world > cannot afford a laptop/desktop computer. There are edit-percentage > statistics in this spreadsheet in columns P and K: > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a-UBqsYtJl6gpauJyanx0nyxuPqRvhzJRN817XpkuS8/edit#gid=1610967999 > Secondly, we always need/hope to find new editors in all the projects, and > if the readers are getting to our projects via mobile, then that could be > the best place to get them started on the path to being an editor > (occasional or regular). Getting readers to take that first step of an > initial edit, can be the hardest part. > Lastly, there's a useful essay by this Ewiki admin about mobile editing. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cullen328/Smartphone_editing > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:21 PM Amir E. Aharoni < > amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote: > > > The tragic thing here is that reading is increasingly done on mobile > > devices, and in some countries it's already the majority of pageviews. But > > editing is mostly done on the desktop, which looks completely differently. > > So editors don't even see a preview of how what they write will look for > > *most* readers. > > > Agreed. > There is an old gadget on Enwiki (and re-used at a dozen other wikis, per > [[m:Gadgets]]) which shows a mockup of how the article might appear on a > small screen. I suspect it needs improvements in a few aspects (design, > performance), but it works quite well. > Anyone can see how it looks (ideally from a laptop-or-bigger window!) with > this URL: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon?withJS=MediaWiki:Gadget-mobile-sidebar.js&withCSS=MediaWiki:Gadget-mobile-sidebar.css > Or here's a screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/juXqcKW.png > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The main problem I see with that is that is changing all the on-wiki > > templates and scripts that work with the current skin. There is also a > > question of opportunity: with less and less desktop users, it just > > makes more sense to invest in the mobile experience (and the beta mode > > there is super cool, but still breaks some templates). > > > Templates that still have problems on mobile at some wikis, can usually be > fixed with the assistance of this page (especially section #12) > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Recommendations_for_mobile_friendly_articles_on_Wikimedia_wikis > -- I'll be sending a reminder to a few VillagePumps about this in the next > few weeks. > > Gadgets/scripts sometimes work as expected across different skins, and > sometimes not. That's a very different and distinct problem from templates. > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 8:58 PM Aron Manning <aronmanni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > That's nice. Try these redesigns with an adblocker for a comparison: > > > I've just added a new batch of links that I learned about yesterday, to > that page. ;) > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Unsolicited_redesigns&diff=930505897&oldid=913318977&diffmode=source > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 1:38 PM Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Erm, I remember what websites looked like in 1996. I even made some then. > > It looks nothing like that. > > > > On the other hand, on the site you linked to? The first thing I see is an > > absolutely huge photo of a robot looking at me. I have to scroll down past > > that to get to the actual meat, the text content. *That* looks like 1996. > > > > I'll take the way we have it over that, thanks very much. > > > I initially learned HTML from this site/book c.1998, > https://web.archive.org/web/20000818170520/http://www.arsdigita.com/books/panda/index.html > and ever since I've appreciated clean simple structured content. I > completely understand what you mean here, Todd. Although I'd balance it out > with: not-all-wikis-are-Wikipedia, and hence some of the Wikivoyages have > their distinct intro-landscape-image design, e.g. > https://es.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Tokio > > I think we all generally endorse incremental improvements, instead of > drastic overhauls. Overhauls can make many users (of any site) confused or > frustrated, and our users (readers and editors) are the whole point of this > endeavour. The problem is there simply haven't been many improvements to > the basic site-design elements over the last decade, despite the numerous > great ideas that editors and gadget-authors and others amongst us (and > beyond us) have had. > > The biggest complexities of any changes here, are the vastly different > needs of all the different demographics/types of users (e.g. keeping things > similar enough so that readers don't get confused when they start to edit; > e.g. not disrupting the current editors whether they use phones or > desktops; e.g. adding new accessibility & usability improvements/options; > etc), balanced with the technical requirements of efficiency given our > current software "stacks". > > Hence the "Goals" and "Constraints" sections (for the TL;DR) in > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements > We're planning on adding/tweaking/changing elements in the UI slowly and > carefully, so that editors can keep on efficiently editing, and readers > (and editors implicitly!) can slowly get a clearer/better reading > experience, over the years ahead. > > There are /many/ ideas for subtle or significant improvements listed in the > project pages (don't get distracted by just the first image in the > slideshow!), and probably more good ideas we're still missing. > Anyone's feedback (hopefully nuanced and friendly) and further > ideas/links/suggestions/etc would be appreciated at that project page. > > Quiddity / Nick > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
