Bureaucrats, content-moderator, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, threadmoderator
85,404
edits
User talk:Mini-mitch/Archive Talk 5: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
{{Please see|Should novels & audio stories have a plot description?}} --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:38, March 23, 2011 (UTC) | {{Please see|Should novels & audio stories have a plot description?}} --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:38, March 23, 2011 (UTC) | ||
==Headings== | |||
Thanks for your commments and criticisms. The reason for the change to all caps was a simple one. It's all well and good for the MOS to say that sentence case is preferred. But the fact is, people weren't doing it. And for every thousand pages that I could change to sentence case via the bot, there were hundreds of pages where the header was too individualistic for a bot to recognize. It's one thing to change every page that has "See Also"; it's quite another to change the one page that has the header "A Noble Return". Since I've spend well over a year on a campaign to get sentence case fully implemented — to at best only partial success — I naturally seized upon the opportunity to take care of the problem with one command. I wish I had known how to do it when I first started working on the style sheet, but I didn't. Therefore, I think what happened is that people had just gotten used to the initial round of changes when — wham! — I changed it again. | |||
I'd strongly urge you to give this new font mix a week or so to grow on you. | |||
As for your specific criticism about the size, I'm not seeing it no matter how much I magnify or zoom in the text. I spent a hell of a long time with the wikia menus on the very top row getting the text size just right. And as far as I can tell, there's none of the collision you're describing. Have you cleared your cache recently? Because there ''was'' a time where what you're describing was true. (An easy way to tell here is whether or not the links under Entertainment are in all caps. If they are, you're definitely looking at an old version of the site. I should point out, too, that this wikia dropdown is '''notoriously''' difficult for all wikis. Many wikis display some sort of collision, at one or more "zoom levels". Don't forget, too, that if you're using Firefox, there are ''two'' types of zooming available to you, each of which distorts the page in different ways. A simple font-size enlargement, however, does not distort any part of our site to the point of unreadability. | |||
As to other points you've made: | |||
*I'm not going to ever recommend or support using the "single =" or h1 level of headlining. That's against the basic tenets of MediaWikia design, and will present many problems. These are detailed at [[Tardis:Manual of Style#Headings]] and [[Tardis:Manual of Style/Headline test]]. H1 is ''strictly'' for article titles. | |||
*I don't know what you mean by "continuous subheadings"? Do you mean having more than one subheading in a row? | |||
*A "website for the near-blind" is an interesting way of putting things. You've got to remember that 20/20 vision is ''not'' normal, statistically. It might be normal medically, but most people don't have it, especially amongst the computer-using community. I perosnally think that headings need to be readable and slightly oversized. To my eye, which is actually 20/20, it gives a certain dramatic flair to things, and is a design feature that isn't present on any other wiki. I realize that there will be occasional headers that are rendered on two lines now that probably wouldn't have been before, but honestly, if the header is that long, it's probably best to think about a way of editing the header down. Specifically, this design looks pretty bad on magazine issue pages. But then again, those pages looked ''awful'' before I started making any changes. Those are just "list" pages, essentially. They don't really ''have'' a design. I think on most pages, where headers are of an appropriate, <6 word length, you don't get double-line headers. | |||
Taking all that on board, if you're ''really'' thinking the headers need revision, there are some compromises we could go for. One thing is that the headers aren't really "big" in a font-height sense. They're w i d e . I've put in letter-spacing, which is not typically done on most wikis. I could dial that back a little. And we could drop the actual font size down minimally. | |||
But I really don't want to give up on the basic design ethos of sans-serif cap headings/serif body text. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''21:15:14 Wed '''23 Mar 2011 </span> | |||
