191–200 of 426 posts
Wikipedia itself is also working on a new UI: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improveme... The English Wikipedia isn't one of the "early adopter wikis" but if you visit, say, the French-language Wikipedia you can see the changes (e.g., different width to improve readability).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it won't. There is no clear distinction between mobile and tablet first of all.
Orientation and width not enough?
OP, thanks for making this, I bet it was fun to build. That being said, I want someone to do the opposite of what this does. Less chrome, less bytes over the wire, less predictive search, less "flatness?", less timely, more timeless .
Oh dang, yeah. An extension that makes the whole web look and work like the default Mediawiki skin would be glorious. And _fast_. I miss windows having borders. Just dug up a registry hack (obscene that such a thing was needed) to force win10 to have window borders again, because I keep ending up in situations where I honestly couldn't tell where one ends and the other begins. They spent decades researching and build…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct, and my claim is that there should be no such concept as "giving out a link to the standard Wikipedia page." Regardless of what type of device I'm using, I should be able to share the URL for that page to someone else regardless of what type of device they're using. The URL should literally be the uniform locator of that resource and shouldn't contain any semantics about any particular user agent's device. Th…
> Regardless of what type of device I'm using, I should be able to share the URL for that page to someone else regardless of what type of device they're using. The URL should literally be the uniform locator of that resource and shouldn't contain any semantics about any particular user agent's device. As I just pointed out, and you somehow misunderstood, this is the exact behavior of the mobile page. It is not the be…
Check this out: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Yeager
It's nicely justified for reading. Superfluous interface is almost entirely eliminated compared to desktop view. It's just such a clean, elegant view for reading a Wikipedia page.
I am one of those people who actually like Wikipedia the way it is. It's what I hoped the web to become. But i am sure there are people who will appreciate your effort. Thank you for your work.
I agree with you except the one pain point that Wikipedia still continues to use "m.*" sub-domains for displaying mobile content. I know most people exclusively use mobile these days but I use desktop browsers for reading more than 60% of the time and its really annoying to click on a Wikipedia link on HN/Reddit and having it open the mobile site on desktop. It's OK to use m.* subdomains instead of reactive design bu…
I am one of those people who actually like Wikipedia the way it is. It's what I hoped the web to become. But i am sure there are people who will appreciate your effort. Thank you for your work.
I agree with you except the one pain point that Wikipedia still continues to use "m.*" sub-domains for displaying mobile content. I know most people exclusively use mobile these days but I use desktop browsers for reading more than 60% of the time and its really annoying to click on a Wikipedia link on HN/Reddit and having it open the mobile site on desktop. It's OK to use m.* subdomains instead of reactive design bu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm with you on links being distracting, but it seems you... nuked them entirely, which maybe goes too far haha? I guess you can always go back to source if you want that.
I just moved them to the bottom of the article. In part this is because I feel inline links on wikipedia often lets you overestimate how well you comprehend a subject. It's as though the fact that there is a link over a word makes you think you could go check what that is, and therefore that you probably understand the word. Actually looking up some term mid sentence is also probably not particularly helpful for unde…
I was actually looking at the footnote links, and those do indeed seem to be missing entirely -- as well as the whole references section. Arguably that's more important than links to "definition" wiki pages, so it forms the basis for the knowledge (vs mostly just definitions).
I recently discovered that if you're logged into Wikipedia, you can customize the UI completely. You can, of course, choose different themes. But you can also upload custom CSS and Javascript! Link to image of preferences page - https://ibb.co/Kbfh1QQ