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).
Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
241–250 of 426 posts
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
That, and the density. I like desktop UIs to be dense. They don't have to be sparse with ample padding like on mobile devices since you don't poke your fingers into your monitor. Yet somehow, people keep designing desktop UIs as if there's a touchscreen or something.
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
That extension doesn't change how the web is. The web is still the same whether you use client side CSS override or not. This is exactly how CSS and HTML were intended to operate and the kind of results to be expected. > But i am sure there are people who will appreciate your effort. Thank you for your work. How is that called ? A complimentsult ?
Not at all a complimensult. I can appreciate the work of someone, if even I won't use it. I don't know how to put it otherwise.
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do a lot of these design experiments. I have an idea such as "what if wikipedia was designed only with reading comprehension in mind" and then I see what taking it to the most ridiculous extreme does. Sometimes it pans out, like I'm fairly happy with this wikipedia mirror, sometimes it doesn't--like I have no logos or branding anywhere on my sites, that turned out to be a bit confusing. My mirror clocks in at 21 Gb…
Interesting. What are the bandwidth considerations for this? I had the impression that many ISPs make self-hosting impractical on normal household plans, but then I've never looked into it seriously.
The bandwidth usage is pretty inconsequential since most of my pages clock in at just a few kilobytes.
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> It's OK to use m.* subdomains instead of reactive design but there should at least be redirects to the correct subdomains. I agree, although in the case of Wikipedia the "mobile" design is actually the one that is responsive. I want the "mobile" design on all browsers including my desktop. I believe you can actually set your default theme if you're logged into Wikipedia, but I don't know if their cookies eventually…
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
What bothers me most about this is that if you go to www on a mobile device, it redirects you to m - that's great, and probably the "right" thing to do. There is probably a "View Desktop Version" link on the mobile page, somewhere. But if you go to the m subdomain on a desktop device, there's no easy way to get to the desktop version without manually changing the URL. If you can redirect from www to m, surely you can…
I feel like there's the issue on Reddit
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#247Why you need this permission "Read your browsing history"? I think you only need access to: "*://*.wikipedia.org/*"
I've just looked into this, it seems Chrome displays that because of the "tabs" permission: > "Technically this permission allows observing the history via chrome.tabs.onUpdated, but not read the previously existing history, so the phrasing is not entirely correct, strictly speaking." https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64063754/chrome-extensio... To be clear, the extension doesn't access your browsing history at all…
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#248I 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
Yeah I’m not actually sure why more people don’t know this.
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#249I 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’m career military and the fact that Wikipedia (and Facebook) have low bandwidth m.* redirects made life immensely easier on the limited internet in far off places. We really appreciated it being available.
Re: Show HN: I made a modern web UI for Wikipedia
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those releases have been EOL for 10+ and 5+ years respectively. There are a number of free options. I don't see any reason to make any effort to support those folks, especially when the font is merely ugly in a cosmetic sense, and not unreadable.
This problem isn't limited to Windows 7/2008 or XP. It affects Win10 too. >especially when the font is merely ugly in a cosmetic sense, and not unreadable Eh, you won't go very far with this attitude in any design team. Also, anyone who tried to manually craft font-family fallback path are already making effort . You can literally choose to not assign any font. Actually, it probably works better: most of browsers hav…