On May 13, 2014 6:32 AM, Gergo Tisza gti...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Gnangarra gnanga...@gmail.com wrote:
just reading through and one issue that stands out with (e.g.:
[[file:foo.png|thumb|no-viewer|…]]). format is that many of the small image
files are embedded
On 19 May 2014 14:50, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
There are images that do not use that syntax but we want to display them,
for example infobox main images, gallery templates, images on the main
page...
But you could launch without the infobox images...?
I think this would
On May 20, 2014 2:46 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 19 May 2014 14:50, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
There are images that do not use that syntax but we want to display
them,
for example infobox main images, gallery templates, images on the main
page...
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:13 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:
The main page seems to be such an obscure case that it might be adressed
when we have a better idea than forcing millions of exception edits what
you think?
Obscure in what sense? I would expect mainpage images to
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:00 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:
Instead of introducing complicated syntax, would it not be better that
media viewer only displays thumbs?
Quoting from earlier:
There are images that do not use that syntax but we want to display them,
for example
Hi guys,
We’ve been discussing the various proposals on this thread and don’t see a
strong consensus yet.
This lack of consensus in our email discussions so far may suggest that our
original proposal to use a separate class may not be the best solution for this
issue.
We are growing
I'd recommend avoiding classes specific to MultimediaViewer for this purpose.
The semantic intent here is to mark images that are not considered part of
regular article content. These would be presentational elements like user
interface icons, images part of a larger construct (such as clipped
whats needed is something that is simple on the front end to use, to
wiki-code and maintain it doesnt matter how good a gadget is if its to hard
for people to work with they will switch off, either through preferences,
other gadgets or altogether.
I know it may sound horrid from a programmers
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Krinkle krinklem...@gmail.com wrote:
Making it specific to the idea of a viewer (e.g. no-viewer,
viewer-exclude, or for-page-only) is better in my opinion, but only
marginally so. I'd recommend aiming for something that reflects what it is
and
allows
i may be mis-understanding the goal …
1, it looks like you want to distinguish between elements on a web page that
should be viewable in mediaviewer vs those that should not.
2. you want to use a css class to distinguish these elements.
3. you mentioned that there may be future or other use
On May 12, 2014 4:32 PM, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We would appreciate your help to come up with a class name that community
members can use to exclude an image from Media Viewer or related tools.
Too many small files (like icons, flags, etc.) appear in Media Viewer
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Gabriel Wicke gwi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Another option is to make this a property of the image rather than it's use
site. That should cover the typical icon well, and with minimal editor
effort.
Most images are hosted on Commons, so that would mean the
just reading through and one issue that stands out with (e.g.:
[[file:foo.png|thumb|no-viewer|…]]). format is that many of the small image
files are embedded within infoboxes, templates and tables would it be more
efficient to restrict media viewer to only images that use the syntax
On 12 May 2014 22:19, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org wrote:
...
Should we take this discussion onwiki? or do you think we can resolve it via
email?
Yes, I don't really understand why this was not on-wiki all along, it
seems more natural as a way of getting views from Commons end users.
I
On May 12, 2014 7:29 PM, Gergo Tisza gti...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, bawolff bawolff...@gmail.com wrote:
Probably much harder to implement... but it might be more consistent to
have it as part of the file embedding syntax. E.g.
[[file:foo.png|thumb|no-viewer|...]]
15 matches
Mail list logo
