Re: [WikimediaMobile] [Wikitech-l] need for an app?
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, at 10:54, Daniel Friesen wrote: > On 2014-08-16, 4:56 PM, Yuvi Panda wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:40 AM, svetlana wrote: > >> Why not use in-browser offline storage? > >> http://www.html5rocks.com/en/features/storage > > One of my favorite articles: > > http://alistapart.com/article/application-cache-is-a-douchebag > > On 2014-08-16, 5:15 PM, svetlana wrote: > > ... > > That is OK, you and Yuvi Panda highlighted some important points. > > Thanks to both - I'll follow-up if I find solution to the application cache > > issues raised in the blog post linked earlier. > > > > svetlana > > Issues? The article is one of my favourites too, if you read through the > whole thing it describes a technique of combining appcache, > localStorage, and an iframe to make it possible for a site like > Wikipedia to be made to work offline. And localStorage could even be > substituted for IndexedDB (with a polyfill for WebSQL only browsers). > > ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] > Could someone please tell me why I'm getting two different threads with this subject in my inbox? I have trouble following. Thought that your point is that offline storage in browser is hard, and that's /why/ mobile apps exist. It's really hard to discuss this by email. svetlana ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
Dmitry Brant wrote: > The fact that you don't see the benefits of the native app over the mobile > website is simply an indication that we still have a lot of work to do with > the apps, which we are excited to do. Partly this is because you don't support my mobile platform. Dmitry Brant wrote: > But, is it a waste of effort to bring a truly integrated, seamless > Wikipedia experience to our users' mobile devices? I don't think so. Nor > is it a waste of effort for the WMF to be seen as a driving force in mobile > design and mobile user experience. I was assuming that integration and being seamless are easily doable from a web browser. Offline storage is hard in a browser, as you pointed out; that's too much detail for me to understand quickly, and I have no comment yet. In principle, such concern is valid. Documenting extra differences and shortcomings of web browsers could be a nice task. svetlana ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
The fact that you don't see the benefits of the native app over the mobile website is simply an indication that we still have a lot of work to do with the apps, which we are excited to do. But, is it a waste of effort to bring a truly integrated, seamless Wikipedia experience to our users' mobile devices? I don't think so. Nor is it a waste of effort for the WMF to be seen as a driving force in mobile design and mobile user experience. -Dmitry On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:40 PM, svetlana wrote: > On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, at 00:18, Dan Garry wrote: > > On 16 August 2014 00:29, svetlana wrote: > > > > > We don't need apps. > > > > > > Read this to find out why you're wrong: > > > http://gigaom.com/2014/08/01/wikipedias-new-apps-are-good-for-you-but-theyre-even-better-for-the-developing-world/ > > > > Dan > > Why not use in-browser offline storage? > http://www.html5rocks.com/en/features/storage > > [then you're not missing out people who have neither android nor ios] > > svetlana > > ___ > Mobile-l mailing list > Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, at 10:04, Dan Garry wrote: > On 16 August 2014 00:29, svetlana wrote: > > > > We don't need apps. We need mobile websites which work as good as an app > > does. > > Oh, the waste of effort. > > > > It appears to me like you have issues with this project that go way beyond > what I can help you with. I suggest you take it up with the senior > management. I won't be responding to this thread further. > > Dan That is OK, you and Yuvi Panda highlighted some important points. Thanks to both - I'll follow-up if I find solution to the application cache issues raised in the blog post linked earlier. svetlana ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
On 16 August 2014 00:29, svetlana wrote: > > We don't need apps. We need mobile websites which work as good as an app > does. > Oh, the waste of effort. > It appears to me like you have issues with this project that go way beyond what I can help you with. I suggest you take it up with the senior management. I won't be responding to this thread further. Dan -- Dan Garry Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps Wikimedia Foundation ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:40 AM, svetlana wrote: > Why not use in-browser offline storage? > http://www.html5rocks.com/en/features/storage One of my favorite articles: http://alistapart.com/article/application-cache-is-a-douchebag -- Yuvi Panda T http://yuvi.in/blog ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, at 00:18, Dan Garry wrote: > On 16 August 2014 00:29, svetlana wrote: > > > We don't need apps. > > > Read this to find out why you're wrong: > http://gigaom.com/2014/08/01/wikipedias-new-apps-are-good-for-you-but-theyre-even-better-for-the-developing-world/ > > Dan Why not use in-browser offline storage? http://www.html5rocks.com/en/features/storage [then you're not missing out people who have neither android nor ios] svetlana ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
On 16 August 2014 00:29, svetlana wrote: > We don't need apps. Read this to find out why you're wrong: http://gigaom.com/2014/08/01/wikipedias-new-apps-are-good-for-you-but-theyre-even-better-for-the-developing-world/ Dan -- Dan Garry Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps Wikimedia Foundation ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
Re: [WikimediaMobile] Fwd: user testing VE on mobile
Hey lets check in on this - with VE in stable I think the context problems need to be addressed. The findings were that most users tested did not notice that the icon in the toolbar was highlighted. Nobody even noticed the context bars, and didn't know what they meant when I pointed to them. My suggestion is to add blue links that say "edit link" and "edit citation" in the context toolbars and give them more height. We can do this easily and then quickly test with users. Maryana I agree we need to keep thinking about this and maybe do something completely different but I think this is a good first step. On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Juliusz Gonera wrote: > I think we should try Kaity's suggestion of adding a prominent "edit" > button in the context and see what happens. It's a much easier change > than reengineering the whole context again. We had a reason to give up > on tooltips on tablets and that reason is still present (native > copy/paste tooltips). > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Maryana Pinchuk > wrote: > > Thanks, Kaity! > > > > I'm not that surprised by the context stuff. There's a lot going on in > that > > top toolbar, and on a big tablet screen, that area is likely to be quite > far > > away from (and thus totally contextually detached from) the > link/reference > > the user has just tapped. > > > > I'm not convinced, though, that simply adding a more prominent call to > > action in the toolbar and/or highlighting the target will be enough to > > overcome the usability hurdle; to me, this requires a rethink of the > > location/shape of the dialog, testing a version that's a floating tooltip > > like on desktop, etc. I'm CC-ing James because we should work out whose > > purvey this now falls under. We're still kinda muddling our way through > our > > collaboration ;) but now that tablet VE has gone into stable, we should > > start thinking more intentionally about the ownership and prioritization > of > > things like this. Specifically: > > > > * Who owns the product specification, design, and engineering work of > > iterations on existing mobile VE features and new features? > > * Who prioritizes this work against the bigger backlog of VE features and > > bugs? > > > > It seems to me that one product owner and one team should be responsible > for > > both of these points – otherwise we might get into a weird situation > where > > one team spends a lot of time designing something and then it doesn't go > > live because it gets deprioritized by the other team, or where new VE > > features are designed with one specific platform in mind and the other > > platform has to play catchup to work right. > > > > James, going forward, I see work like this (e.g., refining and testing > the > > mobile tablet context menu workflow) as an Editing team thing – does that > > sound right to you? > > > > Of course, realistically, the Mobile Web team still has a lot of the > domain > > expertise in mobile devices/browsers and will need to continue helping to > > iron out any mobile-specific issues, review and test stuff, etc. But as > far > > as who makes the call on whether to iterate on this design versus build > some > > new feature on VE, and who does the majority of the architectural > legwork to > > make that happen, the ball seems to be more in the Editing team's court > at > > this point. James (and anybody else who's been involved in the MFE-VE > > collaboration, of course), lemme know what your thinking is on all this. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Kaity Hammerstein > > wrote: > >> > >> We did another round of guerrilla testing for VE on mobile today. > Overall > >> it was much improved from the last tests! > >> Especially these changes: X icon to back icon, arrow icon to word > "next", > >> save page updates, and the switch between edit modes. > >> > >> Here are those findings: > >> > >> Used back button and it did what they expected > >> Hesitated when asked to save but all were able to find "Next" button > >> Filled out the save screen appropriately, although 1 person said it > looked > >> like an error screen at first > >> When asked to switch to wikitext, tapped gear icon almost immediately, > but > >> several people still struggled with "edit" and "edit source" language. > >> Everyone also struggled with the pop-up asking them to save before > >> switching. > >> > >> But the link and reference context bars really failed the user tests. :( > >> Most did not notice that the icon in the toolbar was highlighted. Nobody > >> even noticed the context bars, and didn't know what they meant when I > >> pointed to them. > >> > >> More notes > >> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Design/Research/VE_on_mobile#July_30.2C_2014_test > >> > >> I would suggest we try adding blue links that say "edit link" and "edit > >> citation" in those context bars, to show a user what they'll be doing > >> specifically. The taller height will also make the bar more noticeable. > Then > >> we can te
[WikimediaMobile] need for an app? (was: [Wikitech-l] Future platforms, devices, and consumers)
(Duplicating this mail, as I wasn't subscribed to mobile-l a minute ago.) On Sat, 16 Aug 2014, at 12:45, Nkansah Rexford wrote: > [...] > The Wikipedia app is currently under good development and I think its doing > great. We don't need apps. We need mobile websites which work as good as an app does. Oh, the waste of effort. I truly pledge you to work together to make a website which is so good that an 'app' is redundant. svetlana ___ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
