That's how its currently implemented (with an attribute named mode). How it all works (Or even if it gets adopted), will depend on the sort of feedback I get.
You're 100% right, that this would not work well with the COM:QIC workflow, and there are many places where the captions are important. But I would argue there are many places where people just have captions as a place holder text since there is a spot for a caption (Many [not all] galleries on commons fit this description). In particular, the captions on the auto-generated galleries in category listings are pretty useless, and could easily be replaced with something triggered on hover. Even in encyclopedic contexts, a gallery is used as a collection of pretty pictures, and the caption is a sort of "see also" text to provide further context for if one of the images catches the reader's eye. --bawolff On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Daniel Schwen <li...@schwen.de> wrote: > If this should find its way into core, it should be made optional > (using an attribute of <gallery>)! Please be aware that this would > instantly destroy gallery applications like COM:QIC. Also from a > usability standpoint hiding the captions is probably not always a good > thing. Especially in the context of an encyclopedia rather than a > "pretty picture" site (like flickr). > Daniel > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM, bawolff <bawolff...@gmail.com> wrote: > > [Cross posting to commons-l and design list] > > > > Hi all, > > > > Over the last couple days, I've been looking at making our <gallery> tag > a > > lot more slick. Compared to other websites, our galleries look very > "boxy" > > imo. This isn't that bad when it comes to icon/clip art type media, but > for > > photos I feel we could really do better. So I've tried to make the > galleries > > be more compact, with rows of images all the same height but different > > width, and the caption visible on hover. The only downside to this is the > > borders of the gallery become a little ragged, which mostly looks fine > to me > > (Possibly could be dealt with with js. Would involve a bit of double > loading > > the images though). > > > > A demo speaks louder than words, hence: > > > > * > > > http://tools.wmflabs.org/bawolff/gallery/index.php?title=Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media > > (contrast with > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media > > ) > > * > > > http://tools.wmflabs.org/bawolff/gallery/index.php?title=Featured_pictures/Animals/Fish > > (contrast with > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Fish) > > * http://tools.wmflabs.org/bawolff/gallery/index.php?title=Main_Page > > > > Additionally the wiki is open to editor (You need to register an account > > first), so please don't hesitate to experiment. > > > > Anyhow, this is all still a work in progress, and I would really > appreciate > > your feedback/criticism/hate mail/love letters/etc. > > -- > > Thanks, > > Bawolff > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Commons-l mailing list > > Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l > > >
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
